Podcast appearances and mentions of kim schrier

What’s Trending: A new poll shows Bob Ferguson has a commanding lead over Dave Reichert. Israel has killed Hamas terrorist Yahya Sinwar, one of the chief architects of the October 7 massacre. // Democrats and the media are very upset with Bret Baier over his interview with Kamala Harris. // There’s something fishy going on with Washington’s 8th congressional race between Kim Schrier and Carmen Goers.  

Today - we cover U.S. Representative Kim Schrier's recent visit to Wenatchee, where she highlighted the impacts of the Inflation Reduction Act. And later - Don Schaechtel, a resident of Leavenworth has been named the Arthur R. Kruckeberg Fellow by the Washington Native Plant Society, or WNPS. Support the show: https://www.wenatcheeworld.com/site/forms/subscription_services/See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What’s Trending: Joe Biden and Kamala Harris held a rally on the economy today. Meanwhile, Trump held a press conference in Bedminster, New Jersey. // Guest: Carmen Goers is taking on Democrat incumbent Kim Schrier in Washington’s 8th Congressional district. // Washington State has opened a new police academy in Vancouver in an effort to address the state’s staffing shortage. Neighbors near Seattle’s Magnuson Park have reached their breaking point with noise complaints.

ICYMI! A re-broadcast of our Washingtonians for Harris-Walz virtual Zoom event and fundraiser, a co-production between Washington Indivisible groups and the Washington State Democratic Party. It was held on the evening of Monday, August 12th. This event features a who's-who of Washington (and US) political and activist leaders: U.S. Senator and Harris-Walz Campaign Co-Chair Chris Coons (D-DE), Washington State Democratic Chair Shasti Conrad, U.S. Senator Maria Cantwell, U.S. Members of Congress Adam Smith, Pramila Jayapal, Suzan DelBene, Kim Schrier, Governor Jay Inslee, candidate for U.S. House and State Representative Emily Randall, candidate for Attorney General Nick Brown, King County Councilmember Girmay Zahilay and state lawmakers Jamila Taylor, Kristine Reeves, and Drew Hansen. Viewers also heard from Seattle Drag Queen Nemesis, podcast host and political consultant Crystal Fincher, Fuse Executive Director Aaron Ostrom, Indivisible Co-Founder and Co-Leader Ezra Levin, and Alliance for Gun Responsibility Executive Director Renee Hopkins.

What’s Trending: The illegal immigrant that killed Washington State Trooper Chris Gadd had his bail significantly reduced. A thief stole over $1k from a teen at a pawn shop in Lynnwood. // Early returns from Mulanomah County in Oregon suggest that radical DA Mike Schmidt and Pramila Jayapal’s sister have lost in their primary elections. Meanwhile, Rep. Kim Schrier is getting a primary challenge in Washington’s 8th congressional district. // Memorial Day weekend travel is going to be chaos.

WA issues new Covid guidance, Rep. Kim Schrier argues for a TikTok ban, and the Seattle Reign are getting a new owner. It's our daily roundup of top stories from the KUOW newsroom, with host Paige Browning.We need YOUR HELP to keep making Seattle Now. Donate to our home, KUOW, and help us raise $1 million in one day for our Spring Pledge Drive Thursday: https://www.kuow.org/donate/seattlenowWe want to hear from you! Follow us on Instagram at SeattleNowPod, or leave us feedback online: https://www.kuow.org/feedback

The Monologue: More suspicious powder has been mailed to another Seattle synagogue, this is the 4th synagogue that has been targeted with these attacks, an unidentified woman in Seattle was seen and filmed ripping down flyers of hostages taken by Hamas. Dr. Kim Schrier has condemned Rashida Tlaib over her comments on Israel. Florida Democratic Rep. Jared Moskowitz said on CNN that he would support a censure on Rashida Tlaib. A Jewish professor at Union College called out a student who said all students who went to an event supporting victims in Israel have a place waiting for them in hell // LongForm: Brian Kilmeade on the special relationship between Booker T. Washington and Teddy Roosevelt -- and how it could be applied to today // The Quick Hit:  Ex-Democratic Congressman Tim Ryan Calls on Biden to Drop Out of the 2024 Election: ‘Right Thing to Do’

On this week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and Founder and Editor of The Needling, Lex Vaughn! They discuss how the Seattle Police Officers Guild (SPOG) Vice President who mocked Jaahnavi Kandula's death is now on red light camera duty, how a KING 5 story effectively victim blamed Kandula for what she was wearing, and how Seattle will pay nearly $2M after a man died of heart attack after incorrectly being on a 911 blacklist. Crystal and Lex then talk about Senator Nguyen's bill to detect gas price gouging, the Week Without Driving, Burien making their camping ban worse, how Bruce Harrell's dual responder program fails to civilianize crisis response, and a new GOP candidate in the 3rd Congressional District race. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Lex Vaughn at @AlexaVaughn.   Resources “Maritza Rivera, Candidate for Seattle City Council District 4” from Hacks & Wonks   “Ron Davis, Candidate for Seattle City Council District 4” from Hacks & Wonks   “Seattle police officer heard joking after woman's death has been taken off the streets” by Mike Carter from The Seattle Times   “New video shows moments before woman is hit by Seattle police vehicle” from KING 5   “Seattle to pay nearly $2M after man dies of heart attack at address wrongly on 911 blacklist” by The Associated Press and KIRO 7 News Staff from KIRO 7   “Sen. Nguyen moving forward on bill to detect price gouging at the gas pump” by Brett Davis from The Center Square   “Could You Go a Week Without Driving?” by Tanisha Sepúlveda from PubliCola   “Burien Makes "Camping" Ban Worse, Auderer Now on Red-Light Camera Duty, Harrell Order Subtly Improves New Drug Law” from PubliCola   “Harrell's Dual-Responder Proposal Would Fail to Civilianize Crisis Response” by Amy Sundberg from The Urbanist   “Lewallen emerges as GOP alternative to Kent in rematch with Gluesenkamp Perez” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times   Find stories that Crystal is reading here   Listen on your favorite podcast app to all our episodes here   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Tuesday topical show and our Friday week-in-review delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, the most helpful thing you can do is leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. If you missed this week's topical shows, we continued our series of Seattle City Council candidate interviews. All 14 candidates for 7 positions were invited and we had in-depth conversations with many of them. This week, we presented District 4 candidates, Maritza Rivera and Ron Davis. Have a listen to those and stay tuned over the coming weeks. We hope these interviews will help voters better understand who these candidates are and inform their choices for the November 7th general election. Today, we're continuing our Friday week-in-review shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: Pulitzer prize-winning journalist and Founder and Editor of The Needling, Lex Vaughn. Hey! [00:01:36] Lex Vaughn: Hey, nice to be back. [00:01:38] Crystal Fincher: Great to have you back. And I just have to say before we get into it - The Needling is so good. You do such great work there. And like the last two weeks are as good as it has ever been. There's no one in the country doing it better than The Needling right now. It's just absolutely great. If you guys are not tuned into The Needling - website, Patreon, social media - please get into it. [00:02:03] Lex Vaughn: Thank you so much, Crystal. [00:02:05] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Well, we have a number of things to talk about this week. Wanna start off talking about an update to the story of pedestrian Jaahnavi Kandula, who was killed by an officer who ran over her while going over 70 miles per hour in response to a call - although he did not have his siren going at the time - and a story that came out in KING 5 also related to that. But just starting - update to that story is the SPOG Vice President, Daniel Auderer, who was caught on tape mocking Jaahnavi's death is now on red light camera duty - has been taken off the street. It is not uncommon for officers to be reassigned to administrative positions while investigations are ongoing - that's the case here. What do you think about where we stand here in terms of accountability? [00:03:00] Lex Vaughn: I think no one should feel like anything real has happened as far as accountability or punishment goes - he's been reassigned, but he could be, as soon as we take our eye off this, he could be put back in the same position he was before. Auderer is still a major part of the guild leadership, so it's like - this isn't just any cop. This is guild leadership that forms a lot of the culture of the entire department, so it's upsetting to not see - once again, how - it's just upsetting to see how hard it is to even get real punishment happening for some of these people after what they do. They should be fired. And I think the next thing I'm focused on is just what's gonna happen in this next police guild contract - it's up this year and it's in negotiations right now. I just, I hope it's slightly better than the contract before - and it would just be nice if it was easier to hold police like this accountable. [00:03:59] Crystal Fincher: I'm right there with you. And I hope it's significantly better than it is right now. And there's a model in place for it - the City of Seattle passed an ordinance in 2017 that included many accountability procedures that the SPOG contract that's currently in place, that was signed in 2018, supersedes. It has written in there that it supersedes City law - so if there's a conflict, the SPOG contract is what wins, basically, over what the City says. And as we've seen, there've been several examples of things that regular people look at and say - This is not okay, this is not what we want - where we see officers commenting across the country saying - This is inappropriate, incorrect. Yet it seems like not much can be done, and the most that's done is they're suspended without pay then reinstated, or assigned to desk duty, various administrative tasks. It's a challenge. [00:04:55] Lex Vaughn: And I'm so tired of the shrug that happens - Well, I don't know, police contract. What are you gonna do? Well, now we're in negotiations. You are actively in a position to do something about it long-term. I don't want any shrugging right now about this 'cause we are actually in a zone where we can change the contract, or change how the City interacts with that union as a whole. I'm just learning myself about what options there are in increasing accountability. Is there a way to decertify this union completely if - I mean, I think a lot of what they support and don't fight against in their own ranks is kind of criminal itself. You're enabling people to kill innocent people - for me, to me, that's criminal. And it's like, I wish that was kind of acknowledged more often - where's the line here where some of what they're doing is criminal. [00:05:49] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and you know, the other thing I look at here is this is a threat to public safety in Seattle, particularly for people who say and believe that - Hey, we need more officers on the streets now, we need to hire more officers, there is a shortage. One, if there's a shortage, why are they responding to overdose calls, crisis calls in the first place and redeploying it? [00:06:11] Lex Vaughn: You know, as outlets like DivestSPD have reported in detail, it's - this call, where this young woman was killed by a cop going three times the speed limit in a high pedestrian area at night without a siren - he was rushing to a reported overdose call where health personnel, paramedics were already headed there. And apparently there were like six police units headed there as well? This is just inefficient, like at a minimum, at a minimum - incredibly inefficient and dangerous. And it really kind of underlines - how could you think we need more cops when in a situation like this, they're over-responding and actually a danger to the community. The entire way this operation is working is faulty and not increasing public safety. [00:07:07] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely not increasing public safety. And hurting the effort that they've invested a lot of money into to recruit additional officers. Since they offered retention bonuses, you know, there was a lot of talk over the past couple of years that - Oh, they need more money, they need an incentive to stay. Well, the incentive is not money. Many of them are compensated fairly handsomely, but since that was approved and they've been receiving retention bonuses - the attrition has not improved - we're still hurting as badly as we ever have. And it's time - and I appreciate Tammy Morales in a forum last night, as well as others, and there've been several other people who've also talked about this - just plainly stating, Hey, these incidences happening are a problem, are a disincentive for people to apply to be a police officer, to want to be a police officer, particularly in Seattle. And especially when so many cities are talking about having shortages, why would they choose a city that has so many visible problems and problematic officers instead of another one there? So, I mean, this is - the culture is as much of a problem in terms of recruiting as anything else. But also, we do have to stop and say - What are we even doing overall? - to your point. I also want to talk about this KING 5 story that came out recapping it, but got a pretty severe pushback and lots of call-outs - because in that story, they detailed what Jaahnavi was wearing, while it - was it dark colored this or that, you know, potentially talking about a drug test. And as you said - to be clear - she was in a crosswalk. She was doing exactly what she was supposed to be doing. The person doing what they weren't supposed to be doing was a person responding to a call that was questionable that they should be going to anyway. [00:08:55] Lex Vaughn: I cannot stand anyone acting like - Oh, she just didn't look both ways. This was a high pedestrian area - at night, no sirens. How many of us would expect, as soon as we're entering a crosswalk, for a cop, a giant car to barrel at us at over the speed limit of what's, on our freeways? Okay - that's fast. She didn't, she barely comprehended what was going to happen to her before it happened to her. [00:09:26] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely, and when you look at there, it's not - one, it's a crosswalk, and drivers should be aware of crosswalks and crossings marked or unmarked. This is a marked crosswalk - there's a crosswalk sign, there's barriers in the road - this is not an area - Oh, who would know that there would be a pedestrian there? Like, if there was a place for a pedestrian to be, it is there. And to essentially victim blame in that way and not talk about the responsibility of the person in the vehicle that has the power to instantaneously obliterate someone - what their culpability and responsibility was there - is just really disgusting. [00:10:04] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, I have to say, I'm really disappointed in KING 5 for that report, 'cause I mean, in Seattle, I think we tend to think of KOMO as the station that would run something like that, not KING 5. And it's hard to understand what the motivation of that report was. I mean, I guess they were maybe giddy that they had new video that hadn't been seen before, and I don't know, maybe there was only so much they had to say about it - she's wearing black clothes - but it just came off as very victim-blamey. You know, this is not a report that you wanna turn into a pedestrian safety cautionary tale - where that's not really the moral of the story here - 'cause I think any of us, most people, that would have happened to them, no matter what they were wearing, I doubt that cop would have all of a sudden had time to brake if she was wearing yellow. He was going way too fast. [00:10:57] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Absolutely going too fast to respond in any kind of way at that speed, to be able to take any kind of evasive action - and we see that in how the accident played out. I think this is reflective of the super car-centric culture and how problematic that is - instead of realizing that everyone has a right to use the roads and therefore everyone, whether you're walking, biking, riding. But the responsibility that people have in understanding that - yes, if you have the potential to do greater harm, then you must take greater responsibility. The consequence for a pedestrian walking out into the street to a car is negligible - there's going to be no damage there, right? Like, you know, looking at the worst-case scenario is entirely different than someone losing their life. And so I suspect in this situation - a problem that we've seen in lots of news media in that they saw the video, they looked at the police report and what the information that the police gave out, which unfortunately too often only focuses on, especially when situations when police are involved, only focuses on the pedestrian that is involved or the non-police entity that's involved. Just really striking, we - was the officer driving - were they tested for drugs or alcohol? Were they, I mean, you know, a sign of impairment there, so how in the world it makes sense? [00:12:22] Lex Vaughn: They were not. She was, he wasn't - despite the fact that this guy who ran her over, apparently had had his driving license suspended in Arizona the year before he came here and got hired with a bonus. So, you know, if you think these bonuses are getting us anyone quality, all you have to do is look at this case - not the case - we're not getting anyone special here. [00:12:48] Crystal Fincher: Well, you know, I don't know who it's bringing, but there absolutely needs to be a different strategy implemented here. And everyone needs to do better in reporting, and considering how they talk about this, and what our stance as a community is about this. I also wanna talk about another story this week that didn't seem to percolate, but that was surprising to me. And it was news that Seattle had to pay nearly $2 million to the family of a man after he died of a heart attack after getting delayed response because his address was wrongly on a 911 blacklist. One - okay, there's a 911 blacklist - there's news. [00:13:29] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, I did not even know that. Oh, God. [00:13:32] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, so the situation is this person had a heart attack, fell out - had lived in the unit for a year. The people who lived in it before him wound up on a list - and responders and police say they keep a list of people who have been hostile to or problematic with police, which, you know, I don't know what hard and fast rules about that, how subjective that is, but you can see how that could come to be. But they wound up on this list because of a prior tenant - that wasn't told to them on the call, there was no indication, you had - no one has any idea - [00:14:06] Lex Vaughn: I had no idea that was a thing. [00:14:09] Crystal Fincher: - that - yeah, that the list exists or that they may or may not be on it. So this guy's lived here for a year. It's not even like he just moved in there. [00:14:16] Lex Vaughn: And I'm like - oh my God. So it's like based on address, not even like phone numbers? 'Cause like I would imagine almost everyone has like a cell phone now. Like almost no one has a landline. [00:14:27] Crystal Fincher: Some people have a landline. [00:14:28] Lex Vaughn: I mean, okay. [00:14:29] Crystal Fincher: Some people don't have cell phones. [00:14:30] Lex Vaughn: It's like a small fraction of people. [00:14:32] Crystal Fincher: Most people do, some people don't - but either way - so they call and they're like - Okay, help is on the way. But the help is - they see there's a flag, so they have to wait for basically police to co-respond with them, which delays the call. You know, another 911 call comes in after a paramedic is apparently on the scene, but not going in because they're waiting for police. And they're saying help is on the way, but no indication that there's a delay. The man passes away because of - looking at the settlement, feeling like had he received more timely medical care, he certainly would have had a better opportunity to survive. But that this was the reason why he died - and that this list exists, that finding out through this, that evidently the list was neglected - they don't take people off the list or hadn't before this - was very problematic. In response to this, they're now saying they'll age people off of the list after 365 days. But you can imagine- [00:15:28] Lex Vaughn: Why did it have to take this to do that obvious a thing? [00:15:31] Crystal Fincher: Why did it have to take this? And how does no one engage with the fact that, especially with half of Seattle residents renting, right? [00:15:39] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, I'm a renter. And I read this and I was like - Okay. I mean, I've lived in this place that I'm in for three years, so well - I mean, I don't know. It's like, I want to check - I don't know who lived here before. [00:15:53] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, how do you get on? Is there an appeals process to come off? The lack of transparency surrounding this seems like it could create another situation like this in the future. So this was a story reported by KIRO 7 - would be interested to find out exactly what criteria are to get on the list. Are people ever removed from the list now other than aging off? And even with things aging off over a year, people move all the time - renters move all the time - this is absolutely disproportionately impacting people who rent. And a year is a long time to wait for something to edge off. If you have an emergency and you haven't lived in your place for a year, who knows if when you call 911, there's some reason that you don't know why people aren't responding. So I found that just really interesting. [00:16:43] Lex Vaughn: And just another important part of that report is that apparently a dispatcher was punished and also sued the City because he tried to fix that system. And he was kind of like wrongfully punished on the job for trying to bring up and reform that 911 blacklist. And it just seems like - wow, you know, a person like me - I didn't even know it existed, but I think we all got to take a hard look at that 'cause that's a tragedy that didn't have to happen. [00:17:14] Crystal Fincher: Absolute tragedy. And very interested to learn more about how that list operates and if it is in line with best practices and it just seems- [00:17:24] Lex Vaughn: It seems very outdated. [00:17:26] Crystal Fincher: It really does. Wanna talk about another story that is part of a larger story. And it's Senator Joe Nguyen, our state Senator, is moving forward on a bill to detect price gouging at the gas pump. Gas prices have been in the news a lot lately - they find their way into the news every year for a variety of reasons that - the price of gas is high. It's a cost that a lot of people incur. And as the prices rise, people feel that in their budgets, certainly - don't wanna minimize that at all for people who are on a tight budget. But for people who care about that, I hope they also have urgency in dealing with housing costs, childcare costs, some of the biggest costs that people have. But gas is a factor in there, and so we have a situation where gas prices are volatile - they have been, they always are. In this situation, we have Democrats and Republicans calling for a couple of different solutions. Republicans call for a gas tax holiday, they blame the Climate Commitment Act - which was passed here in this state, which assigns basically a price to carbon - and saying, This is the reason why gas prices are high. Other people have pointed out for quite some time that we still have these oil companies making record profits and that accounts for more of the gas price there. And these increases in price don't seem to correlate with the increase and decreases in cost. And we hear - Oh, you know, refinery's offline for maintenance. Well, that seems to coincide with major holiday weekends and times when they know people will be driving to make the price skyrocket. California passed a bill similar to this, which Joe Nguyen said he looked at and is modeling this off of. And they found that there was some, you know, shady stuff going on. And what this does is basically establish a commission, or a tribunal, or some organization that can review pricing information and kind of proprietary data from these companies - saying that this isn't public data, so it's not like there are gonna be competitive disadvantages for sharing and it's not gonna be given to the public. But this group can review it and say - Okay, is this in line with costs, or are you just raising the price of gas to price gouge consumers - which appears that it's happened before. So this is an interesting bill that Senator Nguyen is moving forward with to detect price gouging. And I'm gonna be really curious to see how this plays out. What do you think? [00:19:47] Lex Vaughn: I mean, I'd be interested to see how they plan on changing that behavior. 'Cause I guess I applaud the effort to detect price gouging and do something about it, but I'm almost in like a state of - I've just accepted oil companies do that all the time. I mean, I think especially in that year after - since the war in Ukraine, it seemed like there was a period where they were artificially jacking up the prices when they didn't really need to - even after President Biden had taken action to reduce that problem, the prices were still high. So I'm just so used to the price gouging that I assume is always happening, I'm like - Oh, okay, you gonna do something about it? Good luck with that. I don't have high hopes, but- [00:20:34] Crystal Fincher: Well, I think there are bigger structural issues involved. I mean, we are trying to phase out fossil fuels in a long-term perspective, and that is going to make the cost of gas increase in the long-term. Now, as with many things - and part of that is the price is inherently volatile, it's gonna become more volatile, especially as - even if we wanted to burn all the oil in the world, there's a limited supply of oil. So this was coming at some time. How do we make this transition in a way that is as fair and equitable as possible? And that's what the proceeds of the Climate Commitment Act are supposed to do - these proceeds that are exceeding expectations from these carbon credits - that's what the push towards more renewable forms of energy, electric cars - but even better, getting the cars off the road and using transit - and making, building our infrastructure and building our communities in a way that make that a viable and attractive option for people. 'Cause right now we still have a long way to go for that. And in this Week Without Driving, many of us are experiencing that firsthand- [00:21:39] Lex Vaughn: How was that? [00:21:39] Crystal Fincher: It's still ongoing. I shared online that I have a trip today to make where it's a two hour one-way trip, even though it's only 17 miles - but it underscores how important it is to improve transit service everywhere - and it benefits everyone. We have to get out, we have to mitigate the impacts of climate change. We have to get on this and accelerate our efforts to meet our 2030 goals - to have a shot at meeting our goals that are further down the line. We have a long way to go, but improving the accessibility and the experience on transit will improve traffic, will improve air quality, will improve finances. It costs a lot less if that's a reasonable option to do. [00:22:24] Lex Vaughn: I'm always shocked when people aren't completely on board with building great public transit as fast as possible everywhere. 'Cause even if you're a driver and you're never taking public transit, how is it not in your interest as well for as many people as possible to be in public transit? You get less traffic. It should be a win-win-win for everybody to get more of these things online. [00:22:49] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think there's a lot of misinformation about there. And I think the way that we have allowed communities to build and grow - that we've allowed sprawl and basically enabled- [00:22:59] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, yeah. [00:23:00] Crystal Fincher: -the inaccessibility of transit in communities makes people - the default lifestyle for many people is a car-based lifestyle. And we've allowed transit to atrophy in many places, if it even was readily available in the first place. So people - when people can't see it and can't see it working, they have a hard time conceptualizing it. [00:23:22] Lex Vaughn: Oh yeah. And I mean, whenever you do that Google Maps route - I mean, I do that sometimes where I'm like - Oh, what's the public transit route? If it's very long, I'll opt for using my car for part of that trip somehow. And that usually is the defining thing, right - is just looking up on a Google Map - is this a half hour trip or a two hour trip? [00:23:43] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. [00:23:44] Lex Vaughn: I mean, that's a big difference. [00:23:45] Crystal Fincher: It's a humongous difference. And for several - I fortunately am privileged enough to not have to drive often. But for those I do, that's an absolute consideration. And I would like to take transit. And there are some advantages even on a longer trip - you can do other things, you can multitask, you can just decompress - you don't have to be present and aware, paying attention while you're driving, you don't have the stress of traffic sometimes, which is nice. So I mean, even on a longer trip, there are some advantages to transit, but also it can be less convenient depending on there. And if you have to walk a long way, especially in poor weather, when it's cold. Or if there aren't adequate facilities at a transit stop - I saw someone yesterday comment, Hey man, I looked up something and it was a two and a half hour trip, and my bladder can't securely make that trip and we don't make public restrooms readily available to people. There are a lot of structural barriers in place for people to be able to use transit, and we have to do a better job at removing those barriers if we're gonna make progress. And so the Week Without Driving is really bringing that home to a lot of people in ways that we can talk about, but when you do it and you feel it, it just provides additional insight and urgency into that. I also wanna talk about the City of Burien - yet again - who passed their camping ban and then decided to make their camping ban worse. So what Burien did was now expand the number of hours per day in which being unsheltered will soon be illegal. PubliCola has been doing an excellent job covering what's been happening in the City of Burien - we will link this article and update in our show notes also. But basically the Burien city attorney said that the city decided to make the adjustment after learning that shelters begin making their decisions about who to admit around 4.30 in the afternoon. And by 10, most are closed. And according to him, it would be too late to take people there - that's questionable reasoning. And by starting the ban earlier in the evening, the city thinks that it can plausibly say shelter was available - which is important in order to pass the constitutionality test - and that people refuse to accept it. Those are not hard and fast rules, and especially with some of the new shelter coming online, it is more flexible. The shelters making such decisions and closing early are part of the reason why it's hard for people to do that anyway. A meaningful percentage of people who don't have homes still have jobs. Lots of people who don't have homes or who are housing insecure have jobs. And if their shift goes beyond 7 or 8 or 9 or whatever the closing time is- [00:26:32] Lex Vaughn: Very unreasonable. [00:26:33] Crystal Fincher: -you have to choose between keeping the job that has a shot at either getting you back into housing or keeping you from falling into a further precarious position on the street. It just doesn't make sense. So they expanded the hours that they were doing that. During the meeting - there's a lot of misinformation that comes from the council majority on this council - they were saying that they, Hey, it increases the amount of time that they're able to camp, which is just false. Like it was weird. It only allows camping between 6 a.m. and 7 p.m. - or the ability to be in public while you're unhoused, basically - even though that there aren't good options for where these people to go. And as we've been reminded several times, options are available and on offer to the City of Burien to have people have a place to go - land has been identified for them. And this is a seven-member council, it's a split council - so four members in the majority, three members in the minority. That four-member council majority has not decided to take the county up on the offer of a million dollars to help with long-term placement, hasn't taken - two entities now who have offered Pallet shelters here. It's just really unfortunate. [00:27:49] Lex Vaughn: Has that city been sued yet? Or like - 'cause it does seem illegal. I mean, they're not even, they're rejecting housing for these people and then doing this camping ban at the same time. I would think that's illegal. [00:28:03] Crystal Fincher: Well, that's the question. And it does strike a lot of people as illegal, which is one of the reasons why the King County Executive's Office sent a letter to Burien saying that - Hey, because your police department contracts with the King County Sheriff's for your deputies, we're telling you our deputies cannot participate in these sweeps because it's unconstitutional. [00:28:23] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, that's great. [00:28:24] Crystal Fincher: And they say - Ah no, it's not. They try to do an end around and find a loophole by leasing to a seemingly faux dog park organization that - then they could trespass people off of land. It's just a whole mess. [00:28:40] Lex Vaughn: The extent they're going to boot homeless people out of their city is crazy - without helping them. [00:28:48] Crystal Fincher: Without helping them, yeah. [00:28:49] Lex Vaughn: The option is right there, the money is right there - and they're not using it. I imagine a lot of these things just aren't true that they're saying? But is that true - that thing they said about all these homeless shelters accept people at 4.30 and not afterward? Is that a thing? [00:29:06] Crystal Fincher: And the way he phrased it even is vague in and of itself - they begin making their decisions at 4.30. [00:29:12] Lex Vaughn: Begin making their decisions at-- [00:29:14] Crystal Fincher: Yes. [00:29:14] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, and it's like - yeah, just think about, I mean, the average person is not done with work at 4.30. They're not even home from work at 4.30, if they're not a remote worker. And yeah, and there's a lot of different shifts out there that people might be taking. And it assumes that people who don't have shelter don't have jobs, which is just the worst piece of misinformation. [00:29:38] Crystal Fincher: Or don't have any other interests, or places to go - it's just challenging. And speaking of the King County Sheriff's, this is a big concern - who are they gonna have to actually enforce this? - which is a question that was asked. And Deputy Mayor Kevin Schilling said on the dais that - Hey, the King County Sheriff's Office signed off on the change. However, PubliCola followed up with the King County Sheriff's Office, and a spokesman for King County Executive Dow Constantine told PubliCola that the county has not made a decision about whether and how to enforce the law. So, that is absolutely not true - what Deputy Mayor Kevin Schilling said - that evidently is still under review. And it looks like they were, once again, in a rush and moved hastily without even knowing if this is something that they can enforce. It is just, it's just a challenge. [00:30:31] Lex Vaughn: Come on, Burien - get some new people on that council. [00:30:34] Crystal Fincher: Speaking of challenges that are pretty easy to foresee, or things that don't quite make sense based on what we're being told - is news that, hey, finally, finally, the mayor's office who has had the funding to do this and for some reason hasn't for a long time, announced that they're going to launch a dual responder program. However, this dual responder program would still fail to civilianize the crisis response, which is what the mayor's office had initially said they wanted to - we had a conversation with Deputy Mayor, then-Deputy Mayor Monisha Harrell on this show about that before. But in the way this is going to be - in the way it's proposed, in the way it looks like it's going to happen - a new Community Assisted Response and Engagement Department, or CARE Department, will launch a dual dispatch pilot consisting of teams of two civilians, some of whom are behavioral health providers, who can be dispatched alongside SPD officers. And so this program hired six responders so far, $1.8 million has been proposed from the mayor in the 2024 budget. And in the press conference, which I think you said that you watched, they talked about this being similar to or based on programs that have gotten acclaim in a few other major cities. However, ours is substantively different than theirs - in that, theirs don't rely on co-response - meaning that an armed officer has to go with someone all the time - or they have options out of that, that is not a requirement of the dispatch. And there's good reason for that. One, most of these calls don't apply to that. In Denver's program, they found that they only needed to call for armed police response 2% of the time where their crisis responders were dispatched - especially as you said before, when they're saying they don't have enough cops to do the job that is expected of them, you would think that'd be like - Oh, that's great news. We can deploy our resources in areas where they can be more effective. [00:32:44] Lex Vaughn: That's why it's probably a dual response. They don't want our city to discover that we don't need police at every single one of these calls. And it's unfortunate that the mayor and this police department are more concerned with how can we get this police department more money, more people. It's, I guess, a rough transition here - to say the least - to get this city to wrap its head around the fact that you do not need police at every single one of these 911 calls. And in fact, it's very dangerous for a lot of these cops to show up, especially in cases where someone's having a mental health crisis or something. When I was a reporter at The Seattle Times, I unfortunately reported on cases where someone was having a mental health crisis and they were shot for not immediately obeying orders. That was, you know - I - if you have a loved one that struggles with mental health issues, the police - they're not who you want to call. It's dangerous, 'cause I think a lot of police are - they're just too willing and ready to shoot as soon as they're not listened to. And so I'm very disappointed that this is a dual response thing, when it's so clear we need that CARE team to just respond on their own, with their own expertise, without anyone armed on the scene. [00:34:09] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and especially in crisis calls, armed responses - an armed presence - is its own escalator. [00:34:17] Lex Vaughn: Yes - yeah, like duh - for anyone. And then imagine you're also in crisis - just not a great mix. [00:34:24] Crystal Fincher: It's challenging. You know, Crosscut previously reported that while only 2.2% of calls for service in Seattle were crisis calls, those calls accounted for 25% of Seattle officers' use of force. And if we recall, Charleena Lyles in 2017 was a perfect example of that, really unfortunate example of that. It's just really challenging. They seem determined to have an officer respond - to your point, it seems like they are afraid of relinquishing anything. But that seems to be happening - if you listen to their logic - at the expense of everyone else's safety and more effective deployment across the city. Then another really meaningful point brought up is just the scale of this pilot - what are we really able to see? [00:35:12] Lex Vaughn: Six people, right? [00:35:12] Crystal Fincher: Six people - yeah, absolutely. And that is completely out of line with the scale of the programs in these other cities. [00:35:21] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, Albuquerque - 70 people. They're really doing it. [00:35:25] Crystal Fincher: Look at how many officers we have. Look at the size of the city. And one thing that's been noticed by lots of people for a long time is that we put out these pilots, we say we need to see results, and we need to get data on them to see if they're gonna continue. And you just throw a couple people out there - and you can't reasonably expect any meaningful intervention from a few people. Now when you do look at that, they do outsize good for what they're there. So it's like, just imagine if we were to appropriately invest and deploy in numbers that could effectively manage this problem citywide. But we continue not to do that, which is frustrating, and watch more of the budget continue to go to police officers, vacant police officer positions - and it's just frustrating. [00:36:16] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, I mean, it's like the police department and the City are trying to make this argument that we don't have enough officers. And it's like - Well, what if we're just not doing this efficiently at all? And it's just unfortunate to see that the priority here seems to be retaining dependence on a police department that is as bloated as possible, and not just creating a more efficient public health and public safety kind of operation system here. Like you said, a lot of these calls - they do not need an armed cop, especially one that might be barreling through a high pedestrian area at 75 miles per hour, coming to the call. And if we're really interested in public safety here, I really think we don't need more cops. We need to use the cops we have more efficiently, with more accountability. And expand this other program, the CARE program, and let them respond independently to a lot of these calls and expand it. And I'm worried that this program is being set up to fail. Some people might say that - Well, this is better than nothing. It's a start. - I guess, but I think it's being set up to fail. This is six people - not that many people - and they're not being allowed to be the first to intervene, which is really where I think the magic of those programs happens. It's like - Wow, the situation did not get escalated. This person got the help they needed without a gun on the scene. [00:37:48] Crystal Fincher: And it feels like someone is coming to help, right? And it really is the difference in - is someone coming to help me, or is someone coming to control me? Is someone coming to make me do something, to stop me? [00:37:59] Lex Vaughn: Yep, that is - that's it - right there, yeah. [00:38:04] Crystal Fincher: And that makes such a big difference when someone is already in a place where they're unstable, where they're worried, concerned, where they're not perceiving things as well as they can be. And then expecting them then to be able to - oftentimes be calmer than the officer that's responding - and just rationally follow everything. You're being called because this person is not behaving rationally, right - so we know that from jump - everything else that stems from that, it's predictable that that's not going to have a great outcome. And again, we have to get to dealing with the root causes of this. There's nothing a police person can do to address a behavioral health crisis. [00:38:47] Lex Vaughn: That's not their expertise at all. [00:38:49] Crystal Fincher: That's not their expertise, it's not their job. It's not their - no training, no resources in order to do that. The people who actually can make those connections - who do understand our complicated and inadequate, but you know, system - and to try and get people in there and to get them some help that they need, so this is not a chronic problem. So this doesn't escalate. It's really important. The last story I want to talk about today is the emergence of a new GOP candidate in Washington's 3rd Congressional District. This district is now notorious for being one of the biggest districts in an upset race in 2022, where Democrat Marie Gluesenkamp Perez beat Joe Kent, a very far right-wing Republican in 2022 - biggest upset race in the country. And so Joe Kent announced that he was running again, he's been running, and he's endorsed by the likes of Trump and you know, a lot of really, really, really far right extremists. And that is what a lot of people blame on his loss that - wow, even that was too much for this pretty solidly Republican district. So it looks like other Republicans in the state - I don't want to call them moderate Republicans, 'cause I don't think that is an accurate descriptor - but ones who realize that Joe Kent- [00:40:11] Lex Vaughn: Maybe just smarter, like more strategic Republicans. [00:40:16] Crystal Fincher: Right - is a tainted brand, right? And are trying to operate more strategically. And so Leslie Lewallen, a city councilmember in Camas in Clark County, has entered the race and drawn early support and endorsements from prominent Republicans like former Attorney General Rob McKenna, former Secretary of State Sam Reed, and Tiffany Smiley. And Tiffany Smiley, who's the challenger to Patty Murray in 2022. And so they are not going the MAGA route, they're trying to go the other route. Although if you look at the issues that she's talking about, this is really, you know, how they're dressing up someone who holds a lot of the same core beliefs when it comes to women's choice, when it comes to these really troubling attacks and book bans that we're seeing in schools, attacks on the trans community and the LGBTQ community - just a lot of worrisome things. This is not, you know, what we had previously described as a moderate Republican. This is still a pretty far right Republican, but it's not Joe Kent. And, you know, Joe Kent is out of touch with reality in a variety of things - it's hard to really explain how wild this guy is without just being like - look at this, I cannot - I had to do this in 2022. Like I can't do justice to what this is with an explanation, just watch him talk. [00:41:42] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, him and Loren Culp were kind of an insane, you know, pair to talk about back then. [00:41:48] Crystal Fincher: They were just not in touch with reality. But, you know, this will be interesting. And we see this effort, with Dave Reichert in the governor's race, to try and dress someone up as a more moderate Republican to kind of assuage some of the fears that people have of someone too extreme. MAGA - the MAGA brand - is not popular throughout the state, that's not a winning brand in the state. And Republicans have been losing ground because of it. But I think, especially when we look at a lot of these races in King County - like I'm thinking of the 8th Congressional District race, the Reagan Dunn race against Kim Schrier - even someone who has, you know, traditionally branded themselves as a moderate, they still hold beliefs that are pretty repugnant to lots of people. Kind of first and foremost, the issue of abortion rights, right - these are pretty fundamental rights. The issue of privacy protections - pretty fundamental rights. Wanting a stronger safety net - pretty fundamental, you know, support by a lot of people in the state. And Republicans seem to disagree with that. [00:42:48] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, or at a minimum, they're just spineless because Reagan Dunn, at certain points, has - if it's advantageous to him, you know, hasn't been as conservative, but just depends on where he's trying to mold himself. [00:43:03] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. [00:43:04] Lex Vaughn: Yeah. [00:43:04] Crystal Fincher: So at this moment, Marie Gluesenkamp Perez has a pretty substantial financial lead. I think I read that she has like a million and a half dollars and Joe Kent has like a shade under $500,000. But I - this will be a district that this cycle, I'm sure, attracts a lot of attention and a lot of outside spending. Definitely on the list for Republicans to pick up. Now, you know, we're sitting here as Republicans just kicked out Speaker McCarthy, which makes Patty Murray now second in line to the presidency since there's no current Speaker of the House. But, you know, Republicans have problems from the very top of the ticket all the way on down, so it'll be interesting just to see how they manage this chaos. [00:43:49] Lex Vaughn: Yeah, well, this whole next year is gonna be an interesting Republican identity journey - I don't know if it's a crisis, they've kind of been in crisis for a little while, but it's - they're gonna have to make some decisions about who they're gonna be in the future. Are they gonna continue the Trump route or are they trying to find this other, I don't know. I guess almost as far right, but just a different tone, different leaders at the helm kind of leading that. I don't know. [00:44:24] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, very - it'll be interesting to see. And, you know, we'll have another shutdown battle coming up in about a month. Who knows if we'll have a speaker by then? Who knows if we'll be in any better position for anything by then? [00:44:39] Lex Vaughn: I just heard yesterday there's a possibility of Trump being a speaker? [00:44:43] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, so- [00:44:45] Lex Vaughn: Oh my God, I didn't know that was a thing. [00:44:47] Crystal Fincher: Fun fact is the Speaker of the House does not have to be a member of the House or Congress. So yeah, they can appoint - they could do that with Trump if they wanted to, I think? [00:44:58] Lex Vaughn: Ahh, this world is insane. [00:45:00] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's, you know - it is frustrating - the Republicans are not a party serious about governing right now. And I just wish we would contend with that more directly. Or at least- [00:45:14] Lex Vaughn: And the people who vote for them. Like what are you doing? [00:45:16] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. So we'll continue to follow this, but that will certainly - is an interesting new element in that 3rd Congressional District race that will have impacts here locally and nationally. And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, October 6th, 2023. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Shannon Cheng. Our insightful cohost today is Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist and Founder and Editor of The Needling, Lex Vaughn. You can find Lex on Twitter @AlexaVaughn, V-A-U-G-H-N. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can find me on Twitter and most other networks @finchfrii, with two I's at the end. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on Apple Podcasts, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to the podcast to get the full versions of our Friday week-in-review shows and our Tuesday topical show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time. [00:46:41] Lex Vaughn: Bye.

Amy talked with Democratic pollster Anna Greenberg. Anna is a senior partner of the polling firm GQR. In 2022, she polled for several high-profile House and Senate campaigns, including Senator Mark Kelly from Arizona, Senator Michael Bennett from Colorado, and Congresswoman Kim Schrier from suburban Seattle.Amy and Anna started with a conversation about why some polls, including some by Democrats, overestimated Republican strength in 2022 [01:27], and the role abortion and the Dobbs decision played for Democrat successes last year [10:19]. They also discussed 2024 and why Anna thinks regardless of who the GOP nominee may be, the Republican party remains defined by Trump [12:16].And finally, they talked about the issue of crime and how, in Anna's words, Democrats are "too scared of the left and they're too scared of the right." [31:50]Cook Political Report subscribers can access bonus content, full transcripts, and video recordings.

On this midweek show, we present Part 1 of the Hacks & Wonks 2022 Post-Election Roundtable which was live-streamed on November 15, 2022 with special guests political consultants Dujie Tahat and Kelsey Hamlin. In Part 1, the panel breaks down general election results with discussion of why the feared Republican red wave did not materialize and what lessons Democrats should learn and act upon to maintain and increase the structural advantages they now hold across Washington state. The example of Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez's surprise win in the 3rd Congressional District can be a roadmap for Democrats looking to expand into other areas, and the increase of Democratic majorities in the State Legislature point to the importance of institutional support for candidates outside the conventionally-accepted norms who aren't afraid of being bold. Stay tuned for Part 2 of the roundtable releasing this Friday for more election analysis! As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-hosts, Dujie Tahat at @DujieTahat and Kelsey Hamlin at @ItsKelseyHamlin. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources Hacks & Wonks 2022 Post-Election Roundtable Livestream | November 15th, 2022   Transcript   [00:00:00] Bryce Cannatelli: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Bryce Cannatelli – I'm the Post Coordinator for the show. You're listening to Part 1 of our 2022 Post-Election Roundtable that was originally aired live on Tuesday, November 15th. Audio for Part 2 will be running this Friday, so make sure you stay tuned. Full video from the event and a full text transcript of the show can be found on our website officialhacksandwonks.com. Thank you for tuning in! [00:00:38] Crystal Fincher: Good evening and welcome to the Hacks & Wonks Election Roundtable - Post-Election Roundtable. I'm Crystal Fincher - I'm a political consultant and the host of the Hacks & Wonks podcast. And today I'm thrilled to be joined by two of my favorite hacks and wonks to break down what happened in this 2022 general election. We're excited to be able to livestream this roundtable on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube. Additionally, we're recording this roundtable for broadcast on KODX and KVRU radio, podcast, and it will also be available with a full text transcript on officialhacksandwonks.com. Our esteemed panelists for this evening are Dujie Tahat. Dujie is CEO and Managing Director of DTC. He's a political and cultural strategist with deep expertise across emerging and established nonprofit advocacy organizations, legislative and electoral campaigns, and Fortune 500 companies. They've developed countless strategic messaging and narrative guides that center Black, Indigenous, and people of color, immigrants, queer folks, elderly Washingtonians, and those experiencing homelessness across a range of issues from environmental justice to housing and labor rights. Informed by their background organizing in the Yakima Valley then among artists and social justice advocates in and around Seattle, Dujie has built a career ensuring people at the margins are pulled to the forefront of political power building, organizational priorities, and communication strategies. Welcome, Dujie. [00:02:17] Dujie Tahat: Thanks, Crystal - that sounds very impressive. [00:02:19] Crystal Fincher: It does sound very impressive, doesn't it? Kelsey Hamlin is a Principal Consultant at DTC. She's a communicator, organizer, and researcher who worked for four years as a journalist across the Puget Sound before switching over to nonprofit and campaign work. Much of her skillset centers writing, strategic messaging, design, and politics. She's both covered the Legislature and worked to advance policies through it, coordinating with legislators and lobbyists, gathering data and research, and organizing testimony across coalitions that position proposals for the best success as conditions change. Kelsey's personal advocacy, chosen journalistic coverage, and work focus on social justice and the moments, legalities, and policies that touch people's everyday lives. She treasures keeping things accessible to all in spite of deliberately convoluted and racist systems. Welcome, Kelsey. [00:03:16] Kelsey Hamlin: Thank you, and thanks for having us both here. [00:03:18] Crystal Fincher: Yes, and we were going to have Djibril Diop join us this evening, but he actually had an emergency pop-up, so we are thinking about him and his family and wish them the best. I'm Crystal - I'm a political consultant. I also have the Hacks & Wonks podcast and am excited to get to breaking down and talking about what happened on Election Night. We will start with the Congressional races and one of the biggest upsets, if not the biggest upset, in the country with - in the Third Congressional District, Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez defeating MAGA Republican Joe Kent. So we now see that this is - the race has been called for Marie, she is back in Washington DC now doing her orientation - but this was a long shot. Looking at this race, why was she able to be successful, Dujie? [00:04:17] Dujie Tahat: Yeah, I think that Marie Gluesenkamp - I think that coming out of Election Night, John Fetterman, the new senator from Pennsylvania, got a lot of headlines for progressive populism and running a campaign of good fundamentals. I think everything that got him to the Senate, you could say about Marie's campaign as well. It was really strong in terms of messaging. She came up against an opponent who was clearly unfit for the office that they were seeking. And I think, not for nothing, voters are smart enough to see through that. The fundamentals for that campaign were really, really good. I think the ecosystem, the progressive ecosystem, also came together and rallied around Marie Gluesenkamp, which is a really fantastic thing and obviously, every little bit mattered for her race in particular. I'm really, really interested in seeing her brand of progressive populism begin to take hold within Washington state in particular. I think that our Democratic Party infrastructure is a little bit afraid to go left sometimes. And I think she's laid out a pretty strong and compelling case for what it might actually look like to lead, to be really, really forward with your values. I'm really excited by that campaign and the implications for future races. [00:05:44] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely - and Phil Gardner, who managed that campaign and did an excellent job, talked about this not being a fluke. This wasn't a chance. This wasn't a shock to them. They had a plan. They nailed strategy. They nailed execution - just from the outside looking in. And their take on it, just seeing what Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez said - how did you win this race? What did you do to win people who may not have always voted for Democrats, may generally vote Republican? - and it really is two parts. They made sure they knew how awful - they made sure that everyone knew how awful Joe Kent's views were, and they were extreme. And they gave them an alternative they can be enthusiastic about. And I think, to your point, Dujie, that is the key. It wasn't just, hey, this guy is really bad and scary bad - and to be clear, he was scary bad. But that's not enough, and you have to paint a vision of what you're going to do for people in the district, how you can help people. This is a district that is both suburban and rural, and she had to reach people in all of those areas. And really, it was her strength in the rural areas that allowed her to hang on in this race - when we've seen in prior years, late ballots have allowed Republicans to overtake Democrats in this area. As you looked at this race, Kelsey, what did you see? [00:07:20] Kelsey Hamlin: Yeah, we definitely had a couple of folks in Clark doing other campaign stuff. And when push came to shove, once Marie made it through the primary, a lot of folks on the ground were - point blank - we're going to pivot and focus on this campaign, because that's where the movement needs to happen and that's what we're going to focus on, because it's that important. So on the ground, you just saw door knocking, you saw volunteers really putting their feet in and digging in their heels to make sure that she made it. And ultimately, that's because she went out there and talked directly to people. You see that with AOC, you see that with Fetterman - and so at the end of the day, what matters is these conversations that Democrats choose to have with people or not with people, and where they choose to have those - because Marie was popular across Clark County, not just in the specific town hubs or city hubs. She was popular in various setups and demographics and in different land use areas, so it wasn't like she stuck to one place and called it good. [00:08:29] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And in part of a plan, part of a memo that Phil Gardner shared was a breakdown of just kind of what it's going to take to win. And it says to beat Kent and win the election, Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez needs the resources to accomplish three goals. The first one was maximize Democratic turnout in vote-rich Clark County - certainly maximizing in the more Democratic areas was necessary. But also number two - show up everywhere and make the race closer in rural areas. One third of the voters in the district live outside of Clark County in rural areas, and so improving on past performance was absolutely vital. Marie hails from one of those counties, knows how to connect with those voters. She is a rural voter and has talked about her frustrations of being painted with a broad brush as either nonexistent or only concerned with a narrow set of issues. And she talked about everything passionately from abortion to health care coverage, to the economy, to the extremism - back and forth. And then the third thing on the list was build a cross-party coalition for this unique election, recognizing that there were going to be a lot of disaffected people who had traditionally voted Republican, but never for a Republican like Joe Kent, and really giving them an alternative - to her point - that people could be enthusiastic about, not just - well, let me choose between the lesser of the evils. But someone who actually painted a vision for what life could be and how life could improve in that district. And mission accomplished in that way, and so that was absolutely exciting to see - was as excited about that race personally as any of them that I worked on this cycle - just really incredible to see. And then, we've talked through on the show a lot of times, but we had the Senate race with Patty Murray and Tiffany Smiley. We had another competitive Congressional race between Kim Schrier and Matt Larkin. As you look at those, as you heard some of the rhetoric about whether a red wave was coming, how close this may be, seeing some of the polling showing it being a very close race - how did you evaluate this race and were the results surprising for you, Dujie? [00:11:01] Dujie Tahat: Yeah, I think my main takeaway - and I think Schrier's race was a good sort of object lesson and - is that some of the fundamental structural advantages the Democratic Party has in Washington state are set. All the polls had Schrier winning by 6, even though she wasn't securing a majority - and basically all the entire undecided block came over to the Schrier camp and she ended up winning by 6. I think that for decades now, everybody whose job it is to elect Democrats focused on swing districts, particularly suburban white women. And as the sort of national politics has gotten really rancorous and Republicans have basically turned off that block here in Washington state, I think that block is increasingly more and more entrenched, and I think you see that come through in all of these national races. I think when we dig into some of the legislative races here shortly, too, I think you see the same thing bear out. But I think Schrier, I think for a number of reasons - because of the district she represents in particular, because of its historic swinginess, because of I think also the decisiveness of that outcome, she won by over 6 points, which I think holds with what everyone predicted - all of the FiveThirtyEight projections were around that same mark. I think that that's a really good bellwether in terms of where we're at, and I think it also provides a really interesting opportunity to think about - all right, what's our job now? If that stuff is true - if it's true that we have the sort of structural advantage, now what do we need to do? And I'd like to echo back to showing up everywhere, which is how Pérez won her district. [00:12:51] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. What about you, Kelsey? [00:12:55] Kelsey Hamlin: Yeah, I'm really proud of our firm for kind of calling out and seeing that the entire red wave rhetoric was really just fluff. It was just fluff and nice things to say for the GOP to get out there - that a lot of folks were rather mindlessly just proliferating out into the ether and making a big sensation of it across a lot of outlets and polling places. And yeah, I think we were pretty clear that it wasn't going to be as dramatic as it was painted out to be. At max, there are about 2-4 places where we were really watching to see and knowing it was going to be close. But outside of that, we weren't worried about Democratic majorities here in Washington state anyway - and especially too with our Legislature - I know there was a lot of moving parts for our state, but yeah - we saw the whole red wave thing and saw right through it for what it was. Dujie namely had a post about that from our firm pretty early on, and I think as soon too as the primaries came in - once you collected the votes along party lines for how that was going to play out in the general, it practically played right along party lines - with the only time that that did not was in the 42nd LD. So I think Washington is - Washington Democrats have more space for growth and Washington Republicans have hit their ceiling at this point, which is really good news for us as long as we decide to capitalize on it instead of just repeating talking points from the other side. [00:14:37] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I absolutely think that is correct and the framing of this and these races especially is curious. And I think moving forward, there is some introspection about who we listen to, what kinds of polling firms and what kinds of polls do we take to be serious and credible, exploring - okay, is what I'm talking about backed by data? Do we see anything besides a couple of firms with strong house effects saying something, or is this shown across the wider spectrum and ecosystem of polling and conversations? - so interesting to see. In these races, certainly abortion - humongous issue with the Dobbs decision - was it just about that or was it about other issues too? [00:15:40] Kelsey Hamlin: Yeah, I feel like it's silly that we silo abortion the way we do. I think that, as a topic of conversation, has come up more and more in the past couple of weeks. But it's never only about abortion. Abortion itself isn't only ever about abortion. The decision to keep or not keep a would-be child is an economic decision at the end of the day. It's a very - do I have enough money to put food on the table for a whole another person in my life? Do I have enough money to put them in daycare when I have to go to work if I'm a single mom, or if I'm a mom who already has three kids? These decisions are ones that people make in very highly contextual situations that are not solely about abortion. So when we're talking about whether or not we're going to force people to have births and carry them to term no matter what's happening to them, that conversation is pretty silly and detached from reality. So when it comes to voters, the top of my things were inflation - we can't talk about inflation and abortion as if they're separate. They have to do with each other. We're not sitting here in our lives and being like - hmm, am I going to invite another child into my life, but then not thinking about the fact that food costs so much more now, and rent costs so much more now, and insurance costs so much more now - all these things are what we as everyday people factor into our lives about all of our decisions. So it's never just about abortion at the end of the day. [00:17:12] Dujie Tahat: Yeah, I think Kelsey is sort of spot on, right? I think that abortion is a - one, it is protecting the right to abort if you want that. But it is also a placeholder for, I think, fundamentally an attack on freedom. I think about all of the ways that like Republicans have basically ceded freedom as a core value as they've adopted proto-fascist policy positions. And I think - and related to what Kelsey was saying, I think nationally the second and third top-of-mind issues for voters in some early exit polling was abortion and threats to democracy. And I think the thing that threatens both of those are just our core fundamental freedoms, like the choices that we get to make about my own body and then what we as a collective sort of decide for ourselves. And I think, related to also - Republicans have hit a ceiling here in Washington state. It's because they've ceded - to the extent that's true - it's because they've ceded a lot of that ground. Now, it's up to us on the left, it's up to Democrats to actually take that and then paint a positive vision. What does it actually mean to be a party of freedom? And with progressive values - bundle that up with other progressive values and tell a different story, beyond abortion access. What does abortion access actually get us? What is that future and how are we going to get there? [00:18:40] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. Now we have a slew of legislative races, and the Legislature - this is really interesting this year. Because early on this year, there was a lot of talk about being very concerned about a number of these races, a number of these districts across the state and control of the State Legislature. So we have - in the beginning of the year, it was just like - okay, the 5th, 10th, 26th, 28th, 30th, 42nd, 44th, 47th - several battleground districts. And at the end of the day now - as we looked at the primary results in those, they were certainly encouraging. But even throughout the general, pretty hard fought general elections - a lot of these races had - were very competitive, had quite a lot of spending in these legislative races. I guess looking at a number of them, what overall was your take in the Legislature? And then we might talk about some of these individual races. But overall, how did you see that shaping up early on, and what is your take on how things wound up? [00:19:59] Dujie Tahat: Yeah. I think a good starting point is contrasting the results of 2022 with 2014, which is the equivalent midterm during a Democratic President. And in 2014, the Senate majority, Democratic majority flipped 25-24, even though it was not a real majority because Rodney Tom was doing his majority caucus thing with the Republicans. They lost the majority. At the same time, the House majority shrank from 54 to 40, setting the table for basically a decade of prioritizing political decisions protecting swing districts over maybe doing the right thing. And that was the context in which I think people were walking into this year. And people were afraid - we have bigger majorities than we had in 2013. And everyone is, and we have a historically unpopular president. You have this increase - a really high enthusiasm, even though it's a small sliver - of far-right noisemakers - we'll call it that. And the most amazing thing is that we increase majorities in both of the houses, right? The - I think for me, and I think that in addition to and maybe on top of just increasing majorities on both houses, I think looking at the Senate side in particular, because that's the highest leverage races is - of the 25 Senate races total that happened this year, Democrats only lost seven of them, five of which a Democrat didn't even run in, right? So you want to talk about showing up everywhere, I think it starts right there, right? There's a - I think there's another, based on some analysis Kelsey did - of the 120-something races in the Legislature, a full third of them had no Democrats running. Republicans had twice, nearly twice as many, first-time candidates running. I think we have to get - we have some structural advantages here, but it means nothing if we don't get back to the fundamentals and one of those fundamentals is showing up everywhere. Because it has a compounding effect of - we had some races and we worked out in Eastern Washington. I grew up in Eastern Washington. And when you don't run races, if you don't show up over and over again - when you show up finally with an argument, it doesn't actually land. And so I think that there is this - to my mind, having the structural advantage is great. We have that now. We prioritized that because everybody has been afraid of 2014 repeating again. We have baked that in over the last decade. But now, again, everybody's job whose it is to elect Democrats has to really have some introspection and some self reflection about - what does it mean now that we have these majorities? Now that these things are set - at least our base is - the people who we thought were persuadables have more or less become our base. Who now is the next set of persuadables? Because we need to keep growing that, otherwise we're going to be in the same position as the Republicans are in. [00:23:06] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think that is - I think that makes a lot of sense. And coming into this year, I think you're right - people were in a different mindset - obviously looking at trying to hold on and feeling like they're going to be more on defense. Especially with more of a traditional midterm election field - just those oftentimes are tougher for the party in power. But to your point, the map seemingly has expanded. And Republicans look like they may have challenges with recruiting and being as competitive as they have been in all of these districts before. So it seems - one, it's a mandate for action. People elect people to do things and to make things better, so certainly voters are expecting action. But to your point, this allows the party, organizations, allies to really look at the state and look at how things are on the ground. I look at the 17th and 18th Legislative Districts, which didn't wind up being winning districts for Democrats. But these are districts that have been close and that are still close - 48%-52%, 49%-51% races. And that if there is sustained activation on the ground, if there are candidates running at all different levels, if there are field programs even in off-years, and just real engagement with voters in those districts - in two years, that's ripe for turning blue in a number of these districts across the state. I think that needing to show up and talking with voters, we have a blueprint right there with what Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez just did. Showing up is half the battle. And really connecting and talking with voters there really makes a difference. What did you see here, Kelsey? [00:25:11] Kelsey Hamlin: Yeah, along a very similar vein - you mentioned the 17th and 18th LDs - what I noticed when I ran a lot of data right before, and then right after the primaries - something as a pattern that I noticed was that in these districts where Democrats and Republicans along party lines were - where there was a ton of candidates - they were really close at the end of the day. But then you look at the funds that are given to the Democratic candidates in those districts, and it's comparatively really low. So I'm looking at, again, post-primary finalization election going to general numbers. You're seeing someone who got 45% have about $7k at the end of the primary and their challenger has $92k at the end of the primary - at the same time. And you're seeing a lot of situations where these are winnable districts - they are really close with people that do not have the funds to make it closer. And at the end of the day, you need funds on a campaign - a lot of people don't know this because campaigns are a black box in the public's eye, but the amount of money that it takes just for sheer voter outreach, just for calling people, just for texting people, just for getting to the doors with some literature for folks to look at and reference for later costs a lot of money. And so does all the postage that you add to for all of the mailers that you send to people - costs a lot of money. And so $7,000 at the end of the primary isn't even going to reach one-third of the voters that you need with mail. So it's stuff like this where I really wish, as a pattern, the Democratic Party was a lot more willing to invest funds in candidates who are showing up in these districts with or without the party backing them - have cropped up and said, I'm going to do this because it needs to happen. And then we need to meet them where they are and show up to make sure that it happens and it pushes through at the end of the day. You see that also in Skagit County - there's a race there that's really close, but not maybe not the best narrative set, but regardless - a 49.99%-47.64% race right now. And that's against - I might be looking at the wrong numbers - but very close. [00:27:29] Crystal Fincher: Is that the Shavers race in the 10th? [00:27:31] Kelsey Hamlin: Yes. [00:27:31] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. [00:27:32] Kelsey Hamlin: Yeah - that's a Republican and a Democrat. And to me - I come from Skagit County, so I've always known that on the ground, it had every potential to shift blue. And we know too, with the last presidential primaries, that that was an overwhelmingly pro-Bernie district. So there's places where all of these patterns are happening, we can see on the ground and in data numbers that this is a place where Democrats can expand - and then it's not happening on the money side and it needs to. We need to quit operating with fear and with gatekeeping to only fund people that don't even need the funds at the end of the day - some of them are operating without a challenger and they still got more than some of our swing candidates. So that's a pattern that I see. [00:28:17] Crystal Fincher: Well, and, that's a flip one, because there was actually a lot of Independent Expenditure spending in the 10th Legislative District and a number of these others. And part of the - part of, as you talk about, campaigns are like a black box to a lot of people - and it actually takes a village to elect a candidate is kind of the thing. It takes the campaign and all of their supporters, all of their donors and their operation. In legislative races, the State Party with the Coordinated Campaign often works in conjunction with them, also with the Congressional races. And then there's Independent Expenditures - I work a lot with Independent Expenditures - and that's where that these organizations, who can't coordinate with the campaigns directly, but can participate in electioneering activity in these districts. And so when you see commercials sometimes and you hear "No candidate authorized this ad, this was paid for by some other entity" - that is an Independent Expenditure and there was a lot of Independent Expenditure spending in this district and a number of other districts - to your point, because keeping them is so important and really activating in these districts is so important. I think another thing that was notable to me, just overall, before we talk about some individual races was just looking at the candidates that were running. And I don't know about you two, but I certainly have heard more than my share of statements like - this guy's an ideal candidate. And by that, they mean - usually - older guy, business owner, veteran, well-off, often - just this is someone Republicans can like and warm up to - it feels like code for that. And it's usually just a version of some veteran business owner - someone who they feel can connect with white, suburban, and rural America. But what we're actually seeing is that candidates who are Black, Indigenous, people of color, queer candidates are actually activating voters in suburban and rural areas to a greater degree than some of those white male business owner veteran type candidates. Higher turnout, higher percentages that they're getting, so they seem to be activating the base needed to win to a greater degree. And now whether that's because they're oftentimes more willing to speak more strongly to issues, more boldly to issues, many issues that they may be closer to feeling the impacts to than other people in the community and understand the urgency of addressing some of those things - whatever that is, voters and all types of voters, whether they're, white, Black, Brown seem to respond at this point in time, at least in over the past couple of cycles, to those candidates as much as anyone. So I do hope that as, especially as consultants, and we have these conversations and we're talking to candidates who are interested in running, that we don't discount someone who may live in a rural area but is Black, someone who may be in a suburban area but is Latino, someone who may be in an area but is queer - those are the candidates who are energizing voters and pumping up turnout and building the winning coalitions of today. That's my two cents on that one. [00:32:14] Dujie Tahat: Can I ask you a question, Crystal? [00:32:15] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. [00:32:16] Dujie Tahat: I'm thinking - even in hearing what you're saying, I think - as an ecosystem - IEs, the party apparatus - everybody's job is to elect Democrats, right? I think we overcorrect and over rely on voters with a high propensity for voting, right? So and you're seeing that, I think, in Washington state - that would be places like South King County, east of Lake Washington, basically the outer Seattle metro area. And it feels like we're maybe at a point potentially where that is now, like what I'm saying earlier, that's maybe part of our structural advantage now, maybe we've done that. I'm curious what you see as what would it take, framing-wise, courage implications - what would it take for all of our various apparatuses to be like - okay, now we have to maybe shift towards motivating - instead of propensity to vote, it's likelihood to vote if they're motivated, right? Give them something to vote for in other places like Skagit or in Yakima, or just some of these places where we haven't built much of an infrastructure. [00:33:27] Crystal Fincher: I think - to your question, right now is the perfect time to be having those conversations, because I do think that we're at a point where we can pivot to basically offense, and offense everywhere on the ground in the state. And I do think that - I think for the Democratic Party's survival overall - that if we only focus on talking to people who have been frequent voters, that we're missing out on so many others. And there are plenty of reasons why people don't vote and don't vote with regularity. And the worst thing we can do is sit from a place of judgment, which I don't think - I know that you guys are not, but there have been others in this ecosystem who have - and understand that we better be coming to people with solutions that improve their lives on a daily basis and change they can feel. So some of that - talking about action in the Legislature, action from people who have been elected - so they come back and they say, you put your faith in me to make a positive change, here is that change. And that they're doing things that people can feel on the ground, which won't be everything that everyone does all the time. Sometimes people do things that affect different people and different populations, and sometimes I may feel it and sometimes I may not. But there better be things going on that everybody can feel, there better be something you can point to and be like - okay, I heard you, I see what you're going through, and I have taken action to ease a burden that you were feeling and to make things better. So I think it really starts with governing for everyone in the district now. And whether people are documented or undocumented, whether people are of voting age or not of voting age, and whether people are regular voters or not - that you're governing for everyone in the district and taking tangible action that they can see. And connecting with those people and being in community and conversation, I think, is a very important thing. We see turnout increase when people are engaged. We've seen turnout increase, sometimes not even attached to a candidate, but attached to an initiative or an issue in an area, and people turning out for something that they can see - okay, this makes a difference. But we also have to contend with some of the reality that people have heard a lot of rhetoric from a lot of people for a while. And sometimes they're just like, okay, everybody promises something. Until I see something, I'm going to tune out. And there's a lot that's not easy to see, right? And sometimes there's inaction that makes it easy not to see anything. So I think it is really action coupled with connection and community. And listening - I think that we have a mandate to listen as much as we do to act, and to be in community and just to say - okay, what are you going through? I'm not in your specific situation, but tell me what you're feeling, tell me what your challenges are, and let's see if we can do something about it. The more that people are doing that in community - and I think of Emily Randall, I think of Jamila Taylor, I think of April Berg, I think - there's so many that I can name that I know do a great job of that now. And that's just a model to emulate for even more people. Did that answer your question? [00:37:15] Dujie Tahat: Yeah. Yeah, totally. I love the - govern first. Do good things. [00:37:21] Crystal Fincher: Do good things. [00:37:22] Dujie Tahat: Yeah - good things. Take the credit for it, show up and talk to everybody - yeah, fundamentals. [00:37:31] Crystal Fincher: And lots of people think that political consulting and like we're sitting here, you know, with wizard hats on in the background and crunching numbers and coming up with magical stuff - and really it's just about trying to inform people about who someone is. And to let people know that there is someone who wants to help, but also making sure that they're out there and talking to people and in community. And I guess I will also say - for people who are political consultants - that we also have a responsibility in this whole thing. And who we choose to work for, who we choose to work with, the people who we lend our time and talent to help get elected - that matters, and the candidates that we choose to work with matter. It's really consequential and so, there's also just accountability to be had on our part too for what we put out there, who we help do things, and all that. I do think that that is valid and that we all have to answer for what we're doing and what direction we're moving. [00:38:57] Bryce Cannatelli: You just listened to Part 1 of our 2022 Post-Election Roundtable that was originally aired live on Tuesday, November 15th. Audio for Part 2 will be running this Friday, so make sure to stay tuned. Full video from the event and a full text transcript of the show can be found on our website officialhacksandwonks.com. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler. Our assistant producer is Shannon Cheng, and our Production Coordinator is Bryce Cannatelli. You can find Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks, and you can follow Crystal @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered straight to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave us a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thank you for tuning in!

To break down all of the news from the 2022 election, Crystal Fincher welcomes political strategist Robert Cruickshank back to the show! They review key results from the election, starting with the race for Congress in Washington's 3rd Congressional District where Democrat Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez currently leads MAGA Republican Joe Kent in a race that's still up in the air, and the blueprint this race provides for Democrats for winning in rural areas while maintaining their values. Our co-hosts discuss the King County voters repeated rejection of punitive-punishment based measures, and the clear mandate from voters for action on comprehensive public safety reforms and alternate responses that address the root causes of crime with Leesa Manion's decisive victory over the punitive "law-and-order" candidate Jim Ferrell in the King County Prosecuting Attorney race, and the comprehensive public safety and alternative response measures passed in Redmond and Shoreline. They follow with a look at the Oregon gubernatorial race where Democrat Tina Kotek beat a well-funded Republican opponent in a close race, as well as a review of key Democratic legislative victories in swing districts across Washington by candidates who are younger and more diverse, and who leaned into strong progressive messages instead of being hesitant to talk about them. They discuss the results of King County even-year election vote and Seattle's opportunity for Ranked Choice voting reform in the near future if it doesn't prevail in its current close race. After breaking down the incredibly successful Raise the Wage Tukwila campaign, Crystal and Robert end the show by predicting how the resounding success of progressive Democrats this year will impact next year's Seattle City Council races and beyond.  As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Robert Cruickshank, on Twitter at @cruickshank. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources Institute for a Democratic Future 2023 applications are live! The final application deadline is November 13th. Hacks & Wonks is hosting a Post-Election Roundtable this Tuesday, November 15th at 7:30pm! Stream it live on our Twitter, Facebook or Youtube account.  “Gluesenkamp Perez, Schrier maintain leads in WA congressional races” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times  “$19 is the new $15: Lessons from Tukwila's Minimum Wage” by Katie Wilson from The Stranger   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: Chair of Sierra Club Seattle, longtime communications and political strategist, Robert Cruickshank - hey. [00:00:55] Robert Cruickshank: Good morning, Crystal. Thank you for having me on again. [00:00:57] Crystal Fincher: Good morning. Excited to have you on again in this election week 2022. We have a lot to cover. Before we get into that, I just want to give a couple reminders. We've talked about the Institute for a Democratic Future before - how it's been instrumental to my career in politics - just a great education and network. The deadline for applications is this Sunday, November 13th, so we'll include links to the website information about applying in the program if you are interested. And feel free to reach out to me directly on Twitter, via email if you have any questions about the program. I also want to mention that we are having a Hacks & Wonks Post-Election Roundtable - a live show Tuesday - this coming Tuesday, November 15th at 7:30 p.m. We're going to be streaming live on all platforms. It's going to include Dujie Tahat, Kelsey Hamlin, and Djibril Diop, who is the Director of Government Relations for Washington Education Association and played a very consequential role in a number of the elections and battleground districts around the state - just breaking down the results of this year's general election - expanding upon the conversation that we're going to have today from consultants' point of view and the view of people who were involved in the work being done. So please tune in Tuesday, November 15th at 7 30 p.m. - Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, all of the platforms - we'll share that information in the show notes. So now getting into election results - there was a lot that happened. We will go through a number of them. I think I want to start off talking about the Third Congressional District. What happened in this race, Robert? [00:02:56] Robert Cruickshank: So this is a fascinating, and I think potentially really important, race where we started off with the incumbent Jaime Herrera Beutler, one of the few Republicans to vote for Trump's second impeachment, and that made her a target. Joe Kent, a openly fascist Trump supporter, declared his intention to run against her and take the Republican nomination away from her. In response to that, we had Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez, who is a rural working class Democrat. She and her husband own a auto repair shop, they live in rural Skamania County in a house they built themselves. She's been active in Democratic Party politics as someone who wants to bring rural working class folks back into the party. And she saw, with increasing alarm, Joe Kent getting traction, getting support down there in Southwest Washington. And she decided she would step up and run, especially since it looked like the National Democratic Party wasn't going to take this very seriously, wasn't going to do much. And so she did step in and she and Joe Kent made it through the primary. And now, as of Friday - at least Friday morning - she's leading Joe Kent by a margin of just about 51% to 48%. She, depending on - today's ballot drop may be the final decider as to whether she hangs on and actually wins. And this would be a big victory not just to stop Joe Kent, which is important in and of itself. But Marie is a really smart, sharp person who's been working hard to bring, a populist, working class, rural voice back into the Democratic Party and do it in a way that's also economically progressive and socially progressive. And seeing the campaign she ran, the ads she ran, I think potentially point to a direction forward for Democrats as they really try to figure out what do they do about rural America. She's winning right now because she has a huge lead in Clark County by double digits, but she's holding her own in the rural parts of the county. She's at 45-46% in Kelso-Longview area out on the rural Washington coast. She's not going to win this race without running up decent numbers in the rural parts of the district. And so I think there's a lot Democrats can learn from here. [00:05:16] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And really cannot be overstated how almost miraculous it is for a Democrat to be leading in any situation in this district, given what you just talked about in some of those rural areas - that's better Democratic performance than we have seen in I don't know how long. I don't know that we have. And so even accounting for the fact that Joe Kent is a fascist, not in touch with reality, completely taken with conspiracy theories, white nationalist rhetoric, all of that stuff, she did have to run a positive campaign. It wasn't enough for Joe Kent to be bad. We saw candidates across the country who sounded like him, some of whom won. And we didn't see that here because she was such a strong candidate. She did connect with voters throughout the district in both rural and suburban areas. And it really does seem like it points to the path to victory. First of all - showing up, having a belief that you can, being willing to talk to all kinds of voters, but really connecting the issues that she's talking about - the issues that are important to people in their everyday lives - to the progressive values that actually do improve things materially on the ground and for those families. Just really, really exciting to see. I do hope that as votes continue to come in, she does hang on. We are recording this before we're receiving results on Friday, but I think it is fair to say that the Joe Kent race - if they're hanging their hopes on a comeback, was certainly hoping to see returns that would have been more in their favor yesterday than they actually were. So that is pointing to some signs of hope. We won't know until we see results today, but the ballots did not trend as hard right as they certainly could have yesterday. [00:07:21] Robert Cruickshank: That's correct. And what Marie has done is, in some ways, reclaimed Southwest Washington. There were Democrats representing it in Congress off and on. At the state level, Southwest Washington used to be more reliably Democratic than King County, for example. Like in 1980, Ronald Reagan carried King County, Jimmy Carter carried a lot of Southwest Washington - those old school, rural, logging Democrats, Union democrats had been abandoned by a large swath of the Democratic Party who just gave up. And that outraged Marie. And I know that because I've worked with her personally before within the Democratic Party. And she was one of these leaders who stepped up and said, we can win these places back, but we have to win with authentic values that are rooted in these communities. She ran ads talking not just about working class values, about inflation - she also talked about abortion without hesitation, talking about how important reproductive rights were. And you would hear from Democratic consultants around the country that - oh, if you're in a district like this, you probably shouldn't be doing that. She proved them completely wrong. Even if she narrowly loses at the very end, the fact that she made it this far, that she made it close, and potentially even wins - proves her theory of change in rural America correct. And I think Democrats going forward need to listen to Marie and people from her campaign and people like her about how we reclaim these districts. Again, she may win ultimately based on votes in Vancouver and Vancouver suburbs, but she's not going to be close without running up some good numbers in rural parts of the district. Democrats like John Fetterman in Pennsylvania did the same thing. There's a model here that the party needs to learn from. [00:09:12] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And as you alluded to, this has impacts potentially down the ballot. We are seeing super close races in the 17th and 18th Legislative Districts. These are areas that are potentially in play for Democrats, if they do invest in expanding on the strategy that Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez has started. These areas are ready to vote for Democratic policies if people just connect with them and talk with them, listen, and understand how to communicate how these values can be helpful. I certainly hope to see much more Democratic investment, Democratic engagement on the ground next year in the off year, the year beyond, in the next cycle - these are areas that we can win if we put in the effort and if we put in the resources. And so I am certainly excited and anticipating a significant effort to continue to turn Clark County and beyond blue. [00:10:18] Robert Cruickshank: I would hope so. That's going to take the established structures of the party to take it seriously. Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez has had to do this without that support - the Democratic campaign structures of the House didn't show up, they put in maybe a small token amount of money towards the end. But Marie built this herself with a great campaign team around her. This is not something where DC consultants parachuted themselves in. In fact, they've tried that in this district before in the recent past and lost. So I think another key piece of this is that those party leadership, those folks in leadership from Pelosi on down need to do a better job of listening to the voices of Democrats on the ground who know how to win, know how to win without compromising our values. That's, I think, one of the most important things Marie Gluesenkamp Pérez has shown - we can win on our values with authentic voices, especially authentic working class Democratic voices in the rural parts of the country. May not win everywhere, but if you run up some better numbers, you make a lot of things possible. [00:11:23] Crystal Fincher: There were a number of other races that we saw - races that people were expecting to be close. Of course, Patty Murray versus Tiffany Smiley was not at all close. We saw some polling results that a number of people doubted and cast some doubt on. One polling firm had this polling on a one-point race a week before the election, which just never passed the smell test, and they certainly have a lot of answering to do. But this was a race where Tiffany Smiley and the case she was trying to make was pretty soundly rejected. And certainly, I think Republicans - I know Republicans genuinely thought they had a message that was resonating, particularly with suburban voters. And wow - suburban voters just flatly rejected just about everything they were throwing out - from the fearmongering about crime that was not at all attached to reality or evidenced-based practices about what actually does make streets safer, to the economy, to health care, and absolutely with abortion. That affected the Kim Schrier versus Matt Larkin race. Several races here where it just seems that what they had fell flat. And so just a pretty sound drubbing by Democrats to Republicans across the board - certainly in the Senate and in many of the Congressional races that were originally anticipated to be close. Now, the King County Prosecutor race is another interesting one. What did you see here? [00:13:14] Robert Cruickshank: Again, this is another one of those races that - going into the election - if you listen to some of the observers in the media, was expected to be very close, expected to be an example of backlash to efforts to reform criminal justice. Jim Ferrell, very much running on the Ann Davison platform of cracking down on crime and homelessness and things like that. Leesa Manion, running not as a bold reformer, but running certainly as a reformer - someone who wants to do criminal justice correctly and certainly better than it's done now. And the assumption was that Jim Ferrell would either make it very close or win outright. That's not what happened. Leesa Manion has won convincingly, and won throughout King County. This is not just a Seattle victory. Her victory is countywide. And I think that's a pretty big rebuke to the "law and order" politics that someone like Jim Ferrell has been running on, that The Seattle Times has been trying to push hard, that KOMO has been trying to push hard. King County voters aren't there - that's not what they're looking for in terms of how we address public safety. [00:14:20] Crystal Fincher: That's not at all what they're looking for. And once again, we saw a sound rejection countywide - certainly not limited to the City of Seattle - in every corner of the county, saying that, no, we don't want these punitive politics, punishment that is not at all connected to public safety, making the streets safer, reducing the amount of people who are victimized. And that really is the ultimate goal. There's a lot of talk about punishment. There was a lot of support from very conservative forces, a lot of talk about - hey, we need to enforce the law and put these people in jail and calling into question bail reform, any kind of criminal justice reform, any kind of alternative response that does not include police. We saw police unions rally around this campaign and really see this as a vehicle for increasing their footprint and moving away from some of the things that have been asked for for voters for quite some time. In 2020, we saw with the King County Charter Amendments that - once again, countywide - voters want accountability in terms of public safety. Voters want to address the root causes of crime. They understand that even those who are saying, hey, I'm fine with the amount of police that are there, I have no issue with increasing the amount of police, but we know they can't do everything. We know they don't have the tools to address homelessness. We know criminalizing homelessness doesn't make the problem any better. We've seen them try and fail repeatedly. It's time to do things a different way that actually do have a shot at making this issue better. We know that police don't have the tools to address behavioral health issues, mental health issues - and those services are too hard to find, completely underfunded, and not at all in the shape that they need to be to adequately address this problem. We need to invest in and expand those services and the availability of that. We know that simply throwing people in jail, especially when the issues are poverty, their health, they're related around education - that that doesn't help them and it doesn't help the community. It doesn't reduce the chance that they're going to commit another crime or that people are going to be victimized. We need to do the things that reduce the likelihood of those things happening. We need to do the things where there is evidence and data to show what the path forward is. We've seen plenty of examples of those in pilot programs in Seattle and in King County and have been promised that that was the way things are going - to only see, especially with recent administrations, including the current ones, moving in the opposite direction. And not only in King County, but we also saw propositions in Redmond, in Shoreline that also reinforced that people want accountability and investing in root causes and responses to issues that do need help, issues that do need intervention. If someone is having a behavioral health crisis, if someone is out on the street, that absolutely needs intervention - but by someone who can address the issue. And that's not a policeman in those situations. And so we need mental health professionals, we need service providers, we need all of those. We saw both in local initiatives in Seattle suburbs throughout the county and countywide that this is what voters want. I really hope that our leaders listen this time. I really hope that our media listens this time. And we stop having this conversation that is such a disservice to voters and members of this community that simply focuses on - are we recruiting, are we hiring, are we doing policing? Policing is not the whole picture of public safety. We have to address those other issues. We've seen many cities increase funding and address policing, but have left everything else unaddressed. And voters are practically begging our leaders to take action on a holistic view of public safety to keep us all safer where we all benefit. And I really do hope we start seeing coverage of what's going right, of what voters are saying - beyond whatever police union has the bully pulpit for the day. Talk to people on the ground. Voters are in a much more nuanced place in this than we hear in a lot of the public rhetoric and media. It is, certainly for me, been a source of frustration that this has been pretty obvious for a while and we keep not listening as a whole. I hope finally people will start to listen to what voters keep trying to say. [00:19:24] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I think what you said resonates with voters, Crystal. It's also something we've seen in the election results. When you were talking, I was thinking of the signs I saw from a Republican candidate in the 32nd Legislative District up in Shoreline that said - at the top of her signs - Make Crime Illegal Again. She got a whopping 18%. You talk about the public wanting investment in alternatives - I think of a young man named Kenneth Mejia who ran for Los Angeles City Controller. He put up billboards all over LA and very prominent places showing with bar charts how much money was being spent on the police and how much was being spent on things like mental health services, and how the police were overfunded yet no one was feeling safe. And he ran against a conservative law and order type guy, and won by 20+ points. The public is making it very clear - they do want crime addressed, but they want violent crime to be addressed through solutions of root causes as well as an officer showing up in the right appropriate moment. And the public recognizes that sending a officer with a gun to a mental health crisis is not the right answer. Sending an officer with a gun because someone's in a tent somewhere is not the right answer. There are other solutions we need to be looking at and the public wants those. I think also what we're seeing is that candidates who address this issue, who don't try to duck it and hide from it, do better. Again, Fetterman was a good example of this. But we saw Leesa Manion here as well and we can even look at Oregon. When Democrats start talking about this, the public will listen. When they address it and say, yeah, I hear you and here's a solution, we're not going down this ridiculous law and order path that hasn't worked. Here's what we're going to do instead, and the data shows this works and this matches our values. Democrats do pretty well. And I think that's a lesson for Democrats in local state and federal races going forward. [00:21:22] Crystal Fincher: We also saw, in a neighbor of ours, down in Oregon a really interesting race for governor. How did this shape up? [00:21:31] Robert Cruickshank: It was a race that was dominated by conversation about crime, homelessness - Portland got hit harder by the pandemic and certainly by Trump than we did in Seattle. Whereas we had a short amount of protests here in the city, Portland was where Trump sent in the Department of Homeland Security, picked people up off the streets, there's reports that he was trying to manufacture terrorism cases, working with local officials. They had 100+ nights of battles with protesters and police in the streets. What this led to was - you go to downtown Portland today and it's taking a lot longer to recover than downtown Seattle. There are real issues with folks living unhoused and not getting support services they need. And Republicans, who have come close to winning the Oregon governor's race in the past, thought they could capitalize on this. And certainly didn't hurt that Republicans had Phil Knight, the Nike founder and billionaire, funding them to the tune of millions of dollars. And Tina Kotek, who was the Democratic Speaker of the House from Portland, was being blamed for this. And the media and the Republicans and Phil Knight were all saying - it's your fault, Tina, that all these awful things are happening in Portland. Portland is dying. And what Tina did was she turned into it and said, here's actually what we're going to do, here are the solutions we're going to talk about. Yeah, we're going to get everybody housed and we're going to get everyone's needs met, because that's what Oregon is and that's what we do in Oregon. And she pulled out a victory. She won Multnomah County, which is where Portland is. She won Washington County, which is where the most populous suburbs of Portland are. It was called the day after the election. People thought that Kotek would lose outright or win very narrowly. She's won fairly, by a wider margin than people thought. Another example right there of - when Democrats take this stuff seriously, don't hide from it, but turn and talk about it and root it in our values, they can win. So I think looking at that victory there in Oregon with someone who has been very progressive as a Speaker of the Legislature in Oregon, who'll be a great governor, who's done a lot on housing policy, a lot on other issues as well. Tina's going to be a great leader for the West Coast - something we can learn from in Washington as we have our own governor's race coming up in two years. [00:23:49] Crystal Fincher: Now locally in Seattle, there was an issue on the ballot about how Seattle is going to vote. There was also an issue in King County on the ballot for how King County is going to vote. What is going to happen with how Seattle and King County run their elections? [00:24:06] Robert Cruickshank: We can start with the clearest outcome, which is King County. King County has very clearly - it's settled - voted to move elections for the King County Council and the King County Executive to even-numbered years - that'll start in 2026 - rather than having them in odd-numbered years. And what this will do is increase turnout. City of Los Angeles did this a few years ago - this was the first even year that their mayoral election happened and turnout is significantly higher. Higher turnout means more voters are involved in the process. Candidates have to speak to more voters. They can't just go talk to the old white folks who always vote. They got to talk to everybody. So that's good for democracy right there. In Seattle, the vote came down to a decision between approval voting and ranked choice voting. Ranked choice voting is the clear preference with 75% support. But the first question that got asked is, do you want to change anything at all? No is very narrowly leading on that. I think that's partly due to - voters are still learning about things like ranked choice voting. You also have both The Seattle Times and The Stranger recommend a No vote for different reasons. The Stranger said they support ranked choice voting, but they wanted a different process to get there. But I think coming out of this, there is a very clear mandate from Seattle voters. We want ranked choice voting. The Legislature needs to figure it out, City Hall needs to figure it out. And in next year's legislative session, they're going to need to give not just Seattle, but other jurisdictions, more freedom and leeway to do something like that. [00:25:40] Crystal Fincher: This is coming, in one way or another, to the City of Seattle, clearly. That is a very clear message sent by the voters. Now, I do think there is a fair point to be made about the process by which it happens, just having some more time to really educate and give information about it - I think that's going to be helpful. But really figuring out the how of the implementation to make sure that it's smooth, to make sure there is sufficient outreach and education for voters beforehand, and to make sure that the voters are able to vote in a way that is fair, that there is a - with the Secretary of State - that they're adequately supporting Seattle and any other jurisdiction that wants to make this change and to help make these implementations consistent and successful. So I'm looking forward to seeing how this proceeds. I'm really looking forward to even-year elections. The difference that this makes in turnout is so clear and obvious. Again, you brought up Los Angeles. We are seeing the difference that that is making - so many more people are engaged in elections down there. Even in the primary, so many more people have been engaged and it has shown. And candidates who are not engaging with the public and relying simply on the old tried and true way of just speaking to a narrow slice of special interest supporters and having a big war chest of finances are not having the time that they thought they were. They're actually struggling in this election, and those candidates who have engaged with a broader selection of the public are much more successful this cycle. So I also think this is a positive thing just in terms of not just turnout, but in how candidates need to engage with the public and need to be accountable to their constituents. I think this is a very positive development that we've seen in Los Angeles, and I am excited to see it implemented here with county races and really hope that it expands. There's a bill also to do this in the Legislature. I hope we see that the success of this, and just the very wide margin of passage and support for this, really does help this get through in the State Legislature statewide. [00:28:03] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I think it's a pretty strong mandate from King County to the Legislature as well - that we want that bill to pass to give local jurisdictions the ability to move their elections to even years. One thing you see in some of these small cities around even King County, going into the late 2010s - you had a lot of right-wingers controlling these city councils - Tukwila, Burien, SeaTac had Trump supporters sitting on their city councils in 2017, 2018, even as late as 2019. And even-year elections help mitigate against that because you get more people involved in the process. That's good for small D democracy. I think it'll also make the outcome more progressive, which is good for those who care about that. There's no guarantee that that happens. Ultimately, candidates have to speak to more people, and that's always a good thing. [00:28:53] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, absolutely. And in Los Angeles, we are seeing a very, very close mayoral race. As you said, this doesn't guarantee the progressive outcome, but there are a lot more people engaged. Turnout is increased - it's taking time to count those votes, but we'll stay tuned on what's happening there. Also here, we saw across the state, legislative races in these battleground districts turn out, frankly, much better than initially anticipated. For a midterm year, it's not just in Congress where the party in power traditionally struggles. And we just did not see the outcome that many feared at the start of this cycle. There were people wondering across the board, both in political circles and outside - are Democrats going to maintain the majority in both chambers of our legislature? And the resounding answer is yes. What did you see in a number of these races? I'm thinking of the 26th Legislative District, which is a district that is absolutely a battleground district - progressive senator there with Emily Randall, but who has been constantly under attack by extreme Republicans. The 42nd Legislative District in the north part of Washington, the 47th Legislative District where - full disclosure, we did work in that race - but here in King County, in one of the most diverse areas of the county, but one which is a purple district that has elected both Republicans and Democrats. What were your takeaways and what did you see in these races? [00:30:38] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I think we're seeing Washington become a more stable blue state. And I think the Republican Party is in a permanent downward trend - doesn't mean they'll never win again. I want to make that clear. But right now, the fundamental trends favor Democrats, especially in the entire Puget Sound region. You mentioned the 42nd District way up in Whatcom County, all the way down to the South Sound - Democrats are winning consistently, and it's not just a rejection of the far right. You saw people like Chad Magendanz, who used to be a more moderate-ish Republican State Representative in Issaquah, in the 5th District. He wanted his seat back. And so he ran against Lisa Callan, thinking there's a Democratic woman I can easily beat her. No, you can't. He's losing by 10 points. He had the Seattle Times endorsement. The Seattle Times endorsed another fairly moderate-ish Republican to take on Manka Dhingra in the Redmond area - Manka's winning by a huge margin. You mentioned the 47th District, where Claudia Kauffman is winning against a more moderate Republican. And Republicans even got bounced out of the open State House race there. Federal Way is becoming much more safe for Democrats when it wasn't that long ago - 2014, 2015, 2016 - the most expensive races in the state for Legislature were happening in Federal Way - it was that close. You look at Emily Randall, who's done a great job representing the Kitsap Peninsula and that part of Pierce County out there - Gig Harbor area - really responsive to constituents, running on an unabashedly progressive agenda and winning. It's close, but she's got a pretty strong, stable lead. I think what you're seeing here is a Democratic party that is increasingly responsive. The people who are filling these seats are increasingly younger, more diverse, more representative and inclusive. And I think it is giving Democrats a more stable majority. Republicans are having a really tough time right now - finding a path to a majority. Now, that means Democrats have to deliver. They keep getting these victories at the State Legislative level, and then they fall a little short delivering on things. They did great stuff on climate, they had some good reforms on policing in 2020, which they then stepped back from the next year, which was a big problem. But there's a lot that they need to do on housing, right? Housing legislation died in the 2022 session - that's going to have to come up. We may be entering a recession and they're going to have to solve taxes. I think honestly, one of the most important victories is Noel Frame becoming State Senator. She's a huge upgrade over Reuven Carlyle. Reuven Carlyle spent his time working behind the scenes to undermine or kill progressive priorities left and right to help corporate power. Noel Frame, on the other hand, is leading the way to fix our broken tax code. And I think 2023 is the year finally for Democrats to fix that broken tax code. Now Senator-elect Frame has been leading the Tax Structure Working Group - they're expecting a report on what a new structure for the state could look like that's more progressive and brings in a bit more money. 2023 is the year to get it done - because going into a presidential election year, Democrats are not going to have a whole lot of seats at risk if they do something big in 2023. And given the fiscal forecast, they're going to have to. We have schools that need more funding, school mental health services that need more funding, a healthcare system in crisis. The Legislature needs to step up. Democrats now have majorities where they're not going into each election worrying about whether they're going to lose those majorities. They can keep them if they deliver. And now I think it's going to be on the rest of us who aren't in the Legislature, who are advocates and representing communities, to speak up and organize and make that Democratic legislature deliver in 2023. [00:34:25] Crystal Fincher: And I think you're right on - in addition to just one, being elected and having those majorities - Democrats have a mandate. We saw to a degree that we haven't before - to your point earlier - that Democrats ran hard on their values. And those who did and talked about a holistic view of public safety and bringing comprehensive public safety, who talked about housing being a human right, who talked about the absolute need to expand healthcare coverage, to house people - not simply temporarily shelter, but get people into housing reliably, to control out-of-control housing costs across the board - that these are things that Democrats across the state in battleground districts ran on and won handily on these things. Where there was some question - I know from some consultants, from some Democrats even in leadership - whether they did have a mandate to act on that, whether the public would support those things. We heard a resounding yes from voters. We saw candidates who pledged to take action on these things succeed. And we have leaders who are ready to take on progressive revenue that's going to be necessary to address all of these other issues, particularly in the event of an economic downturn, in the event of budgets going in the other direction. And I do think that we have a helpful blueprint here in the City of Seattle, who recently did implement new progressive revenue with the JumpStart Tax - that is now being used by people who originally opposed that to bail out the City from the consequences of an economic downturn, from budget shortfalls. That is actually providing the necessary revenue, providing stability throughout this downturn period. Progressive revenue really is the key to make sure that the City can continue to deliver services, to make sure that the City can continue to provide residents with the support and assistance needed, to handle infrastructure, to really start to address homelessness in a way that solves this problem, that gets people housed and doesn't just move them from place to place like sweeps do. Progressive revenue really is the stabilizer and the responsible way to handle this. And what I was gratified to see was that opponents, prior opponents of this have now come around and are embracing the JumpStart Tax, are embracing progressive revenue, and recognizing that this is a necessary element of budgets moving forward. I think that there's a lesson to be learned here, as we look at the county budget and as we look at the state budget, that progressive revenue really is the stabilizer here. [00:37:32] Robert Cruickshank: It is. And I think we can also add in the capital gains tax, which the Legislature finally got done last year. And Republicans and their billionaire friends thought, first, that they could repeal it at the ballot box. So that fizzled out. It became really clear, both in terms of their slow going in terms of signature gathering, as well as the polling - no, the public supports taxing the rich to fund education and other priorities. The Democratic elected officials who voted for it haven't paid any price for it. Why would they? The voters want that. They support that. So now you have going into the 2023 session, where they're going to have to figure out how to fund programs and add more funding for things like public education, solve health care problems, and deal with overall budget - the public supports wealth taxes. Senator-elect Frame had a wealth tax proposal that she proposed in 2021 and 2022 - that should be a centerpiece of the discussion in 2023 and her larger Tax Structure Workgroup solution. There is no political downside to making this tax code more progressive. The public wants it. The public supports it. Democrats will face no political cost for doing it. They have no excuse for failing to act. And I think what you point out about Seattle is even people who were skeptical or opponents now understand this is a popular and useful source of revenue that can help solve some problems. [00:38:54] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And I'm definitely looking forward to this coming legislative session and seeing people take action. And I also just want to call out that we saw more diversity in all kinds this past cycle in winning candidates. There has been lots of chatter that I've heard over the years, and even in this past cycle, talking about ideal candidates and candidates who fit their district - even by Democratic consultants. And usually that has been code for - this is an older white male who is a business owner, or a veteran, or previously a police officer. And really it sounds like code for - this is someone who Republicans can like, this is someone who looks like a Republican. And really if we focus on who looks like the community, who is in the community, who reflects the full diversity of the working class, who can speak to and connect with those issues. And we saw younger candidates. We saw candidates of various ethnicities. We saw candidates of various sexualities. We saw people who can speak to the communities of today who are not stuck in some of the old paradigms that are just not fruitful or productive and haven't been for anyone. If we don't make a case on what we need to do when we're running for election, we can't then govern on that. We can't then pass that legislation. And I think we have seen in prior sessions that being a sticking point and a barrier to governing. Yeah, you can have a Democratic majority, but if it is full of people or has enough people who oppose progressive revenue, who oppose comprehensive public safety, healthcare, education funding that's adequate and appropriate - all of these issues that we're facing - then we have just as much of a barrier than if we elected people from the other party. You have to build a coalition around the action that you need to take. You have to build the case for that action in campaigns. I'm so glad that we saw that done by so many candidates who were successful across the state, and that this can then motivate action on the mandate that they've been handed. [00:41:25] Robert Cruickshank: I think that's right. And I think we may and I think we need to see a reckoning within the Democratic caucuses in Olympia on this. The Democratic caucuses have often been led by mostly older white men or older white folks, who have a lot of privilege and who spend their time telling these newly elected legislators who represent their communities more authentically and look like those communities, telling them - no, fall in line, you have to do what we say, you can't deliver on your promises. And that's been, frankly, a source of a lot of toxicity. You saw Kirsten Harris-Talley step away from being in the Legislature after only a single term and wrote a public letter in the South Seattle Emerald saying that the leadership lacked integrity. You've seen others like Jesse Johnson step away, Emily Wicks step away - but more folks keep coming in who represent those communities, who look like those communities, who aren't the older white folks of the past. And I think we who are outside of Olympia need to do everything we can to help change that dynamic, put the pressure on leadership - the old ways of standing on the tracks and saying, no, isn't going to work anymore. We've delivered the votes. We've delivered stable majorities. Now you have to deliver. We are not accepting no for an answer. [00:42:43] Crystal Fincher: Now there is another local race that we've talked about on the show before that is absolutely exciting and an example of what true grassroots organizing, true connection to the community, and what direct action and community action can do. And that's the Raise the Wage Tukwila campaign that was wildly successful. We have not seen a minimum wage initiative be this successful yet here in this state. This was something that included leaders from the business community in Tukwila, labor leaders in Tukwila, the Transit Riders Union leadership, and just a bunch of people who are really passionate about making sure that workers get paid fairly. What happened that you saw in this race? [00:43:43] Robert Cruickshank: I think what we see is that, again, King County - and it's not just Seattle - strongly supports higher wages for workers. You see worker organizing from Starbucks to Amazon is popular and people get it. Working folks are struggling. They're struggling before pandemic, struggling before inflation. And those two factors have made it only more important and more popular to raise the wage. And it's interesting that we've almost come full circle here. I think the national Raise the Wage movement took off in SeaTac in 2013, and grassroots organizations got the $15 an hour minimum wage passed there. And it was a very close vote. That was not a resounding victory by any means. And then grassroots folks led by Kshama Sawant and others in Seattle went 15 Now. And they got that done in part by gathering signatures to say - we don't have a solution that we like - we'll take you to the ballot and we'll win. Now what you're seeing - going to Tukwila - saying, 15 was a good start. It's not enough. We need to keep raising that wage. And voters are responding very, very strongly. And you can see this across the country now, even in deep red states like Arkansas, Missouri - initiatives to raise the minimum wage pass pretty easily. Voters understand that the wages are too low, that people need to be paid better for the work that they're doing, especially those in what have often been underpaid service sector jobs. The public is there. The public wants it. And again, here's another place where Democratic majorities should act. You look at the federal minimum wage, which has not budged since 2009, it's still stuck at $7.25. If Democrats hang on to the House and hang on to the Senate, one of the first things they do in 2023 should be to raise that wage. [00:45:27] Crystal Fincher: It absolutely should be. And it's something that they should move to advance, even if they don't take control of the House. Because to the point that you just made, we saw in a deep red state this year and on the ballot box, just this week, a minimum wage increase pass. We've seen these pass in deep red states. Progressive policy is actually popular with workers. It does materially improve the wages and the lives, living conditions of working people - regardless of what their political ideology is. And they recognize that and they support these things. If Republicans were smart, they would see that their voters, their constituents that they need to win, support this and they should also. And if not, then once again, they're going to be voting against the will of their constituents and something that could materially improve their lives immediately. So this is something that should be ripe for action from Democrats across the country in every state legislative house, every state legislative chamber, every - in Congress - just people from far and wide, from cities and counties on up. We need to see action on this. It's time. The federal minimum wage is pathetically and shamefully low. We can't support anything on that. It's at this point of poverty wage, and we need to do all that we can to move people out of poverty. We need to stop this exploitation at a time when we see record corporate profits with so many corporations and organizations. There is no excuse to be paying workers poverty wages at all. And communities agree. I also just want to call this one out because sometimes these efforts are kicked off and started in coalition with some really heavily moneyed interests that have positive change in mind. But sometimes they come with - it's a small group of people, the same group of people here and some individual interests doing this kind of across the board. This, to me, was really inspiring because we really saw this generate from the ground up. We really saw community activists, people with an interest in Tukwila, people who lived in Tukwila, people who worked in Tukwila deciding to do this, making sure that it worked for everyone in the community, all of the different stakeholders, really doing the work in canvassing and talking to voters. And that is critically important, and I think helped this initiative and is why we see it being so resounding - is having those one-on-one conversations with people at doors makes the biggest difference that can be made. This was a very intentional campaign. They knew that they had to do that work, planned to do that work, executed that work well, and it showed and it paid off. And so I certainly hope to see this model replicated across the state for a variety of things. My goodness, we can run initiatives to build sidewalks for people to be able to get around their communities, to advance transit, to take climate action, to address healthcare, alternative response public safety. These are all things that we can move on on the ballot box locally with initiatives. And what a great blueprint to be able to study and follow. And I really hope people do that. [00:49:19] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I think Transit Riders Union and other folks who did a lot of that work in Tukwila really pointed the way forward for a lot of different types of organizing. Hats off to them for stepping up and getting this done. [00:49:31] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. I'm just absolutely inspired and thrilled. And again, hope people really take a look at the work that was done, the planning that was done, and how they executed it - because that's the way to get it done. Okay, so overall, we saw Democrats have just a really successful cycle here in 2022 in Washington. My goodness, Republicans are struggling. What does this mean for both parties as they move forward? [00:50:06] Robert Cruickshank: I think what we're seeing is potentially a light at the end of the tunnel out of 12 years of the Tea Party/MAGA/Trump movement - this huge backlash to progressive policy, a backlash to a Black President, a backlash to a woman presidential nominee, a backlash to social change. We may be starting to see the other side of that. Democrats picking up seats in places like Ohio is promising. There's still a lot to be done. Things didn't go well in Texas. Things went really badly in Florida for Democrats. New York was a problem, but that's also partly because of the Democratic Party structure there that's ossified and really problematic. But the United States is a center-left country, but we have a Republican Party that is trying to use the laws and the courts to undermine that through things like gerrymandering, undermining voting rights, things of that sort. And it's really a problem. And I think if we're able to have a center-left majority represented in this country - now's a good time for Democrats, especially in Congress, to pass the John Lewis Voting Rights Act, to step up and make sure the right to vote is protected, that gerrymandering is ended. Because what you can do with that then is have a stable Democratic majority in the Congress. We can keep the Tea Party, MAGA, Trump movement at bay and finally start to make some movement on the political, social, economic challenges of this country. So I look at this election as a really hopeful moment. I know a lot of us went into it with a lot of anxiety. I know I did. Coming out of it, I think we should feel hopeful about the possibilities that exist. There's still a ton of work ahead. Maybe we turned a corner - I don't know. We'll see. Trump may announce he's running for president next week, but I feel more hopeful right now about the direction of the country than I felt in a little while. I think that's a positive outcome. [00:52:12] Crystal Fincher: I also think it's a positive outcome. I do also see cause for hope. Obviously, we can't, we don't know what's going to happen with control of the House or Senate yet. We don't know what is in store there. But we did see a sound rejection of people who are that extreme. We did see a sound rejection by voters of some of the most extreme policies there. And so let's take that as a starting point and understand that entertaining those, entertaining any of that kind of talk, painting any of that as a both-sides issue, just doesn't work and is not acceptable. I think from the media to different candidates, we don't have to treat that as valid and reasonable at all. We saw a lot of that in the lead up to this election. And I hope that one of the lessons that we learned is that it's just absolutely unacceptable. So given all of the election information that we saw, with everything that happened in these races, what does this mean for 2023 races, particularly in the City of Seattle? [00:53:31] Robert Cruickshank: There are folks out there from the mayor, to The Times, to other observers and consultants who think that 2023 is going to be a more conservative year in terms of City Council elections. I think these election results challenge that. I think you can see that - even in Seattle, where in a place like Northeast Seattle, the 46th district - Darya Farivar, the more progressive candidate, is winning and winning clearly over her more conservative opponent. You see The Stranger's endorsed candidates winning all throughout Seattle legislative races. I think that what this suggests is that voters going into 2023 are not in the same place they may have been in 2021. I think that you're going to see voters want solutions on criminal justice, on public safety, on homelessness that are responsive, holistic, that treat people as whole human beings - not law and order politics. It's not going to be a year where Ann Davison clones are going to do well. I also think there are other issues that are going to come to the fore - you see Darya, Emily Alvarado doing really well because in part, they're strong supporters of building new housing and solving the housing crisis. Someone like Alex Pedersen in District 4 is going to have a real problem - a district that overlaps the 46th - Alex Pedersen being a hardcore NIMBY, deep opponent of new housing, opponent of bike infrastructure, opponent of transit. He's going to have his hands full in 2023. You have an open seat potentially if Debora Juarez retires in District 5. I think even Dan Strauss is going to have to figure out whether he wants to be more progressive or more conservative with his new district. And you see pundits say, oh, it's going to be more conservative district. Will it? That is potentially an open question. I think that going into 2023, there's an opportunity for progressive Seattle here to lay out solutions that the public wants, that are responsive to engage on these issues - not hide from them, but tackle them all directly, and speak directly to voters' concerns, and point the way forward to building a better city that we all know we can have. Some of these races may be very close, but then Alex Pedersen very narrowly won in 2019. If I'm progressive Seattle, I'm looking at 2023 as an opportunity, not as a time to have to play defense, but a time to go on offense and show voters what we have to offer. [00:55:57] Crystal Fincher: I think that is absolutely correct. And I think you're right to point to the 46th Legislative District results as a perfect example of why. This is a district in Northeast Seattle that a lot of people considered to be one of the most moderate in the City of Seattle, to be a NIMBY stronghold, to be the place where - other places in Seattle, other districts in Seattle, other areas may elect Kshama Sawant, may elect more progressive candidates, but that doesn't work north of the Ship Canal. That doesn't work in those areas where we have more established, higher income, single-family neighborhoods, and they don't want that to be destroyed. There have been a small number of very loud voices that have come from those neighborhoods traditionally. And we have seen in this election, really, a sound rejection of the arguments that they were advancing. We saw that rejection on all levels, from legislative races to the county races to the Senate races - the types of arguments and the type of change that they have said was going to be damaging, that they directly took on in these races, just did not land with the voters. And voters sent a clear message that they want to move forward in a different way. Absolutely a message to both progressives and moderates that this is a different day. And it's not good enough to just say, you know what, I want to listen to everyone, bring everyone together. We just need not to be divisive. We don't need to do anything big or dramatic. Let's just stay the course. No one is happy with the course that we're on. No one is happy with continued inaction on housing while prices continue to just escalate and rise to levels that people can't afford. Everyone is being affected by this in one way or another. We're seeing the symptoms of inaction and I think people are recognizing that. And so people who are building a strong case for what action needs to be done and saying - I'm going to be willing to do the hard work in getting this passed and getting this through - are going to be successful. The role of progressive revenue in these races and seeing forces who fundamentally don't want taxation for extremely high income earners, whether it's landlords or people who are making money in speculative gains, to the heads of these major corporations, to the corporations themselves that have reaped windfall profits especially through the pandemic and beyond. And their workers are still struggling or they're battling unionization efforts. Seattle and these districts are on the side of the workers conclusively. They're on the side of our community. And I think there needs to be a broader recognition of that across the board - from leaders to current politicians to our media - and really get connected with what voters are saying today. It's different. And so I'm really interested to see how these 2023 races shape up. I'm frankly interested to see what even the mayor of Seattle takes away from these elections, because he had previously said in some different venues, some in some leaked commentary that he's recruiting against these candidates. He signaled that he wanted to and was aligned with a more punitive punishment approach, that he was skeptical of some of the things that passed without any kind of controversy in this past election by voters. And so is he reconsidering the direction he's taking? Is he reconsidering those candidates who he is setting up to run, perhaps with platforms and advancing policies that were just soundly rejected? And is he reconsidering how he is aligning and allocating his budget that is currently being discussed now - from the sweeps that we're talking about to asking for frontline service workers' compensation to be reduced to just a variety of different things here - is he reconsidering that? It looks like he did start to reconsider progressive revenue, because he certainly relied on that to bail out parts of his budget and to keep it from being underwater and in a deficit. So it looks like there is acknowledgement that that was the right way to go and that we're going to have to rely on that revenue for stability. Hopefully he sees that moving forward. But I'm really interested to hear what our local leaders and existing leaders' takeaways are from this also. [01:00:53] Robert Cruickshank: Yeah, I think that's absolutely right. And the public wants homelessness solved - people in a tent are our neighbors - they need help, need housing, not punitive solutions. People want crime addressed, but they don't want it addressed with punitive hardcore law and order solutions. Sometimes that may be necessary here or there, but they want the root causes addressed. And I think that this is not a year, and next year will not be a year where sort of Eric Adams-style approach is going to work in Seattle. I think it's a real opportunity for progressives. If they speak directly to the issues, hear people's concerns, and show that we have better answers. And I think certainly comes down to questions of police accountability as well - SPOG contract is becoming an important issue that will come up very soon. And I think you're going to have to see candidates declare themselves. Are they going to be for tough reforms on the police department that hold them accountable? Or are they going to try let them off the hook? And I don't think voters want to see the police let off the hook in terms of them doing their jobs and doing their jobs responsibly, constitutionally, and with accountability. [01:02:06] Crystal Fincher: And with that, we thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on today, Friday, November 11th, 2022. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler. Our assistant producer is Shannon Cheng, and our Production Coordinator is Bryce Cannatelli. Our insightful co-host today is chair of Sierra Club Seattle, a long time communications and political strategist, an excellent political mind, Robert Cruickshank. You can find Robert on twitter @cruickshank. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter @HacksWonks. You can catch Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get all of our shows. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - we'll talk to you next time.  

Hour 1 -- Veteran's Day today, has Donald Trump lost his mind with a now 4th unprovoked attack on Ron DeSantis, US Rep. Kim Schrier defeats challenger Matt Larkin in similar fashion to 2020 victory over Jesse Jensen, Biden student loan plan halted by judge, movie debut today of "Wakanda Forever" the sequel to "Black Panther" which starred the now sadly departed Chadwick Boseman, a KVI caller argues about John Carlson and his Donald Trump comments earlier this hour, a big surge of votes just narrowed the Joe Kent/Marie Glusenkamp Perez campaign from 5% to 2% points. Hour 2 -- Trump attacking DeSantis, four instances now with Trump unprovoked attacks on DeSantis, DeSantis won the majority in Miami-Dade County which is unheard of for a Republican, a pro-Trump caller disagrees with Carlson, seems like maybe Leesa Manion ran for the wrong office in King County, federal judge blocks Pres. Biden's EO on transferring student debt to federal taxpayers, Hour 3 -- Twitter's corporate culture shake-up continues, Elon Musk pulls the plug on Twitter's prior remote work policy, there is something to say about face-to-face interaction for work and employees, some Woodinville HS students say they want police on campus to deter possible school shooting(s), two examples of Democrats who just can't refrain from playing identity politics for their followers, JUST IN: now Donald Trump is directing an attack at VA Republican governor Glenn Youngkin, the frustrating mis-trial of get-away driver Darcus Allen after an accomplice to murder re-trial was ordered, how the jury impacted the mis-trial ruling, Mike Pence is about to unveil a new book about the last days of the Trump presidency.

With Election Day looming and ballots due in a few days, this week's show is a Ballot-In-Review! Crystal is joined by perennial favorite Mike McGinn along with the rest of the Hacks & Wonks team - Bryce Cannatelli and Shannon Cheng - to discuss the recent political climate, break down the context of down-ballot races and why your vote matters. Listen in as the crew opens their ballots and thinks their way through the important choices in front of them. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Follow us on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's ballot party attendees: Mike McGinn at @mayormcginn, Bryce Cannatelli at @inascenttweets, and Shannon Cheng at @drbestturtle. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Time Stamps Washington State Advisory Votes - 05:57 King County Charter Amendment 1 and Proposition 1 -  08:25 Federal Races - 16:54 Washington Congressional Races - 18:00 Secretary of State - 32:00 Washington State Legislature Races - 33:13 LD26 - 33:27 LD47 - 35:30 LD42 - 36:57 LD30 - 38:09 LD44 - 38:22 LD46 - 38:55 LD36 - 39:45 LD37 - 39:56 LD34 - 41:05 King County Prosecuting Attorney - 41:32 City of Seattle Municipal Court - 52:40  City of Seattle Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B - 1:01:48   Reminders Don't forget to vote! Visit votewa.gov for voting resources.   Institute for a Democratic Future 2023 applications are live! The initial deadline is November 2nd, and the final deadline is November 13th.   Learn more about how to get involved in Seattle's budget season at this link and about King County's budget timeline here.   Student debt relief sign-ups are live! Visit this link to enroll.   Resources  Washington State Advisory Votes:  “Tim Eyman's legacy of advisory votes on taxes hits WA ballots again” by David Kroman from The Seattle Times King County Charter Amendment 1 and Proposition 1: “King County considers moving most elections to even years” by Joseph O'Sullivan from Crosscut   King County Proposition No. 1 - Conservation Futures Levy Washington Congressional Races: “Congressional candidate Joe Kent wants to rewrite history of Jan. 6 attack” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times   Straight Talk bonus round: Marie Gluesenkamp Perez and Joe Kent from KGW News   “Rep. Schrier, challenger Matt Larkin clash in debate over who's extreme” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times Secretary of State: Hacks & Wonks Interview - Julie Anderson, Candidate for Washington Secretary of State   Hacks & Wonks Interview - Steve Hobbs, Candidate for Washington Secretary of State   Hacks & Wonks - Secretary of State audiograms - Addressing Democratic criticism of Julie Anderson   Hacks & Wonks - Secretary of State audiograms - Thoughts on Ranked Choice Voting   Hacks & Wonks - Secretary of State audiograms - Experience to manage the broad portfolio of the SoS office Washington State Legislature Races: LD26 - “New ad highlights Washington candidate's past behavior against staffers” by Shauna Sowersby from The News Tribune   Sign up to volunteer for Emily Randall's campaign here on her website.   LD47 - Hacks & Wonks Interview - Claudia Kauffman, Candidate for 47th LD State Senator   “Boyce, Kauffman vie for WA senate in swing district with Kent, Auburn” by Daniel Beekman from The Seattle Times   LD42 - “Sefzik-Shewmake forum highlights abortion, health care” by Ralph Schwartz from Cascadia Daily News   LD44 - Hacks & Wonks Interview - April Berg, Candidate for 44th LD State Representative   LD46 - Hacks & Wonks Interview - Darya Farivar, Candidate for 46th LD State Representative   LD36 - Hacks & Wonks Interview - Jeff Manson, Candidate for 36th LD State Representative   Hacks & Wonks Interview - Julia Reed, Candidate for 36th LD State Representative   LD37 - Hacks & Wonks Interview - Emijah Smith, Candidate for 37th LD State Representative   Hacks & Wonks Interview - Chipalo Street, Candidate for 37th LD State Representative   South Seattle Emerald 37th LD Candidate Forum   LD34 - Hacks & Wonks Interview - Emily Alvarado, Candidate for 34th LD State Representative   Hacks & Wonks Interview - Leah Griffin, Candidate for 34th LD State Representative   Hacks & Wonks Elections 2022 Resource Page King County Prosecuting Attorney: "PubliCola Questions: King County Prosecuting Attorney Candidate Leesa Manion" by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola   "PubiCola Questions: King County Prosecuting Attorney Candidate Jim Ferrell" by Erica C. Barnett from PubliCola   "Leesa Manion, Jim Ferrell tied in the 2022 contest for King County Prosecuting Attorney" by Andrew Villeneuve from The Cascadia Advocate   "Leesa Manion Holds Razor-Thin Lead in King County Prosecutor Race, NPI Poll Finds" by Douglas Trumm from The Urbanist Washington Supreme Court: Hacks & Wonks Interview - Washington Supreme Court Justice Mary Yu   Hacks & Wonks Interview - Washington Supreme Court Justice G. Helen Whitener City of Seattle Municipal Court: Hacks & Wonks City of Seattle Municipal Court Judge Candidate Forum   "Defense Attorneys Say Harsh Sentencing Decision Reveals Judge's Bias" by Will Casey from The Stranger City of Seattle Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B: City of Seattle - Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B   Ranked Choice Voting vs. Approval Voting from FairVote   The Stranger - City of Seattle Propositions Nos. 1A and 1B   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I am Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant - a busy one - and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full text transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we are continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a co-host - and we're adding a little twist. So first, we want to welcome back to the program, friend of the show and today's co-host: activist, community leader, former mayor of Seattle, and Executive Director of America Walks, the popular Mike McGinn. Welcome back. [00:01:03] Mike McGinn: Not quite popular enough - Crystal - you have to acknowledge that, but I think we need to go to the other guests on the show today. [00:01:12] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, so we're coming with you with a full Hacks & Wonks crew today. We have the incredible Bryce Cannatelli, who coordinates everything with the show and holds it down. Pleased to have her with us today. Hey, Bryce. [00:01:29] Bryce Cannatelli: Hey, Crystal. [00:01:30] Crystal Fincher: And we have Dr. Shannon Cheng, who is here to enlighten us also with her wisdom and insight, along with Bryce. Hey, Shannon. [00:01:39] Shannon Cheng: Hey, Crystal - super excited to be here. [00:01:42] Crystal Fincher: You could probably hear the sarcasm in that - but this is going to be fun. We are having a Hacks & Wonks little ballot party - we thought it may be helpful - because we talk about several things on the ballot, we talk about several races. But a lot of times we open up the ballot and there are things on there that we haven't seen, haven't heard of, and are trying to figure out. So we thought we would all just open up the ballots, go through them together - some of us in this call are later-voting people because we like receiving all of the voter communication until the last minute, so we haven't turned them in - but we encourage everyone to turn in their ballots as soon as possible. As we go through this ballot, we will add timestamps and let you know when we discuss the different areas of the ballot. So if you have a particular question about a particular area, you can just go to that portion in the show and figure out that, because we actually have taken some time to discuss what is in this ballot and on this ballot. So good luck. Make sure you get your ballot in. If you can't find it, if something happens to it, if you have questions, votewa.gov, V-O-T-E-W-A.gov is a resource. Or hey, just @ the show @HacksWonks to reply to us and we will try and chase down any answers to questions that you have. So vote, make sure everyone you know votes. This is really important and a lot is at stake locally and nationally. And what we do locally is going to dictate what happens nationally. And with that, I will give a few reminders today. And yeah, number one is vote. Don't forget to vote. The election - Election Day is Tuesday, November 8th. You can go to votewa.gov, that's V-O-T-E-W-A.gov to get all of the information about voting. If something has gone haywire, if you can't find your ballot, if you're not sure what you need to do, if you need information about accessible voting, or if you need to figure out about how to register to vote - which you still can do in person if you haven't registered to vote or changed your address or anything like that - go to votewa.gov and you can get all that figured out. Also, the Institute for a Democratic Future is accepting applications for this coming year's new class. The deadline is November 13th and so make sure to get those in there. I've talked about this before on the show, the Institute for a Democratic Future is great for people who lean left and who want to learn about making a difference in their community, who want to learn about politics and policy, or potentially even having a career - it's responsible for my career in politics. So if you want to learn more about that, feel free to hit me up or visit the website, which we'll link in the show notes. Also, it is budget season around the state - and including in Seattle - and so we're going to include resources for the Seattle budget process as well as King County in our show notes, so stay tuned with that and make sure that you get involved in making your priorities and needs known to your elected officials who are allocating money for the next year or two there. Student debt relief - signing up is happening now. Don't forget to do that. Don't wait to do that. We'll put a link to that in the show notes. And Daylight Savings Time ends this Sunday at 2 a.m. We're falling an hour back. We're moving into darkness in dismay and it's a very sad time for some of us here at Hacks & Wonks who like the extra sunshine in the evening. So here we go into the dark months of winter. [00:05:31] Mike McGinn: But Hacks & Wonks will be on every week to bring some sunshine into your life. [00:05:37] Crystal Fincher: We will try. We will try. [00:05:40] Mike McGinn: Stay tuned in on a regular basis. Yeah. [00:05:43] Crystal Fincher: So let's open up our ballots, crew. Let's see what we have here and start to talk through - for those of you who still have to vote - some things that may be useful, helpful. So the first things we see on this ballot that we've opened up are Advisory Votes. Man, these Advisory Votes on every freaking ballot. We have two Advisory Votes here. How did we get into this Advisory Vote situation, Mike? What is this going on? [00:06:15] Mike McGinn: This was part of the Tim Eyman Full Employment Act where he was trying to find yet another ballot measure to put in front of the people. So what this one does - it is passed by the people - and basically they have the opportunity to have a second opinion on every tax that's passed by the Legislature. So that's why you always have all these Advisory Votes at the top. But everybody approves to-date, the public approves the votes that are passed by the Legislature. It's why we elect people, send them to the Legislature. It's really just turned into extra space on the ballot, which costs money and makes the ballot a little longer. And so we could all save a little space on the ballot if the Legislature changed this. In the meantime, don't upset that budget that your Legislature worked to craft - just vote to approve. [00:07:08] Crystal Fincher: I completely agree with that. I cannot wait until we get to the time where we get the opportunity to repeal this. It makes our ballot longer. It confuses people. This is just anytime there is basically revenue passed, it has to appear as an Advisory Vote, which does not have any force of law. It doesn't actually do anything. It is basically a poll about something that has already happened. So yes, vote to approve. But also I would really like a movement to vote to eliminate these Advisory Votes. One thing it does is it makes the ballot longer, which is not pleasant for a lot of people. What do you think, Bryce? [00:07:49] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah, I wanted to hop in just to say that the choices are Repealed and Maintained. And so the suggestions to vote to approve them are to Maintain them as the maintain option. But yeah, no, I definitely agree. We've talked about it in past shows. We talk about it off the air. Getting people to vote down-ballot is always a challenge. And these Advisory Votes just get in the way of that. I think we'll have more to talk about when we get to the Proposition Nos. 1A and 1B question on the back of the ballot about what length might do to people answering those questions. [00:08:25] Crystal Fincher: All right. So we are here in King County. We all have King County ballots. The next thing I see on my ballot - I think you probably see the next thing on yours - as we travel down from the Advisory Votes, is actually King County, a County Charter Amendment. Charter Amendment No. 1 - even-numbered election years for certain county offices. Question: Shall the King County Charter be amended to move elections for the county offices of Executive, Assessor, Director of Elections, and Councilmembers from odd-numbered years to even-numbered years? Why is it important to move from odd-numbered to even-numbered years according to the advocates for this charter amendment, Mike? [00:09:10] Mike McGinn: The single most important thing you can do to improve voter turnout. When you look at election results in the state of Washington, Oregon, anywhere else around the country, so many more people turn out in an even year because you also have congressional elections or presidential elections. It's just a more momentous ballot than the odd year elections. And so if you think people should vote more, if you think democracy is a good thing, moving it to an even year is great. The county has the option to do that. Cities can't just do it on their own - they need a change in state law. Representative Mia Gregerson has been pushing for that and others have pushed for it. In addition to getting more people to vote, it also really improves the demographics of the ballot. We're getting more young people, more people of color, more immigrant refugees - who are here and can legally vote. We're just getting so many more people voting that we're getting a more representative ballot. So I've been a big proponent of this. You just get a different electorate. You get a better, more representative electorate. And if what you care about, and I do, is more affordable housing - if you get an older, more conservative electorate, they're going to oppose new housing and they're going to oppose new taxes for affordable housing. They're going to be more likely to say, keep the car lane and don't make it easier to walk or bike or use transit. So we need to get an electorate and get elections in even years where we have an electorate that more reflects where we need to go. And hearing from more people, if you believe in democracy, it's great. So big kudos to King County Council for - and Girmay Zahilay, in particular - for championing this. And hopefully we can move all the elections to even years. By the way, we'll save some money too. We'll have fewer elections that the elections offices have to step up for. [00:11:15] Crystal Fincher: I'd love to see it. What do you think about it, Dr. Cheng? [00:11:18] Shannon Cheng: I'm really excited. We talk a lot about - on this show - about how local elections really matter and that local government is really where you feel the actual changes and impacts in people's day-to-day lives. And so having some of more of our local elections in a year where more people are going to be paying attention to it, I think it will be super helpful. I know I talked to somebody recently who felt like they were in Washington state and so their vote didn't matter. And, we're going to get to these other races. And I was trying to tell them, no, we have things on our ballot that really do matter, like the King County Prosecutor and judges and all that. And I think just combining it in a way where people are going to be paying more attention to these things that really matter in their lives will be super helpful. [00:12:03] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. Well said - I agree. Next up on the ballot for King County is Proposition No. 1, the Conservation Futures Levy. So the King County Council passed Ordinance 19-458 concerning funding to protect open space lands in King County. The proposition would provide funding to pay, finance, or refinance acquisition and preservation of urban green spaces, natural areas, wildlife, and some salmon habitat, trails, river corridors, farmlands, and forests. And would reauthorize restoration of the county's Conservation Futures property tax to levy a rate that will be assessed for collection in 2023 and use the dollar amount from 2023 for the purpose of computing subsequent levy collections. So should this be approved or rejected? There are some really compelling statements about this, but this is really important for protecting open space lands in King County. There have been lots of conversations just about the preservation of land, the preservation of open and undeveloped land, and how important that is. These are conversations related to sprawl, related to just air quality, related to just people having the opportunity to recreate near where they live and not selling or developing all available land and the consequences that potentially come from that. So it is important, I think, widely acknowledged as important from people all across the aisle. It's important to maintain all of this. I see a statement submitted by Sally Jewell, who I believe is a former CEO of REI and served in a presidential administration, and De'Sean Quinn, who is a Tukwila City Council member, as well as Dow Constantine. And really, we have to take this action to protect climate change, to protect these last best places throughout King County. So far, this program has safeguarded over 100,000 acres of land, including Cougar Mountain, the Duwamish Waterway Park, and Sammamish River Trail. And they can accelerate that with this proposition. Statement in opposition to it really basically says that, hey, parks are having challenges being maintained, and we've already done enough. I don't know that there's a lot of people here in King County feeling that we've done enough to address climate change or that we've done enough to protect local land. Protecting farms and fresh water, and open space seems like a priority to so many people in this area - and what makes this area so desirable to the people living here and those who visit and eventually come here. What do you think about this, Mike? [00:15:08] Mike McGinn: It's a parks levy. I'm for parks levies, generally. I actually got to run one once, and it was just great. And there's so much more in it than you might think. And if we talk about community - that to me is ultimately what this is about. There's clearly the environmental protection, but that's the quality of life and the community gathering places as well. So yeah, and it's a renewal. It's an expansion and a renewal of an existing levy. And I think every time you get to go to a great county facility, you just have to remember that the money came from somewhere, and this is where it comes from. They really have to pass these levies to make it work, given the way finances work for county and municipal governments. [00:15:54] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. And so this will cost the average homeowner about $2 more per month. There is relief available to qualified low-income seniors and other households. And the funding recommendations are made by an independent advisory committee and subject to external audit. So it's not just, hey, willy-nilly stuff happening here. There is accountability and oversight - looks like it is endorsed by the Nature Conservancy, Mountains to Sound Greenway Trust for Public Land, the Wilderness Society, Seattle Parks Foundation, REI, Dow Constantine and council members - just a lot of support there. I find those arguments to be particularly convincing. But this is an important one that's flown under the radar for a number of people, I think. I've gotten a lot of questions from people saying, whoa, what should I do with these county amendments and this proposition? And so just wanted to make sure that we went through that. Next on my ballot are the federal races, which have gotten a ton of coverage. I think if you listen to the show, odds are you probably know if you're going to be voting for Senator Patty Murray or her challenger, Tiffany Smiley, but that is at the top of the ballot right now. Do any of you have anything to chime in with about this race? [00:17:22] Mike McGinn: It's really fascinating to watch how this race is starting to become part of a national narrative about whether or not there's a red wave - going to hit the federal elections. And then there's some counterarguments. And we could pundit all afternoon on this one. And I'm sure a lot of you, if you're politically oriented, have really been watching the national news about what will happen in Congress. Will the Senate remain Democratic or will it turn Republican? Is the House going to flip? Most pundits say it will flip to Republican control, but there are still some folks out there holding hope that it might not. So I think the real message just is - if you cared about the national scene, you have an opportunity to play locally too. There's a Senate election in the state of Washington as well. [00:18:15] Crystal Fincher: All right. And next up on people's ballots - is going to vary based on where we live. It's going to be the congressional races. So I actually live in the Ninth Congressional District. We have a very competitive Eighth Congressional District race between Kim Schrier and Matt Larkin. Kim Schrier, the Democrat, Matt Larkin, the Republican. We have other races. Who's on your ballots? What congressional districts are you in? [00:18:43] Mike McGinn: I've got Seven, which is Pramila Jayapal and Cliff Moon. [00:18:46] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think all three of you are in Seven there. Those races are a bit less competitive. I think two of the most competitive races here are going to be Kim Schrier versus Matt Larkin. And then down in southwest Washington, actually - in the Third Congressional District - between Marie Gluesenkamp Perez and extremist Republican, MAGA Republican Joe Kent, who is just... It's hard to do justice to him by describing him because I've tried to do it and then I've been like, okay, I can't do this. Here, watch this clip of him and Marie Gluesenkamp Perez in this sit-down with a reporter, just answering questions. And it is wild. He does not think January 6th happened in the way we all saw it happened with our eyes. He thinks that it was a CIA false flag operation. He doesn't think that police officers were killed as a result of that. He's deep into conspiracy theories, deep into the election denial of the 2020 election. Just deep into so many things - eager to cut social security, eager to cut so many things, eager to defund Ukraine between Ukraine and Russia, eager to do all sorts of things at the border. This is someone who eagerly and has multiple times appeared on Tucker Carlson. This is not Jaime Herrera Beutler. This is not the type of Republican that people are used to seeing in this district, or even as people think about Republicans in this country now - even the more extreme version that people are getting familiar with. This is the tip of the spear of the most extreme. He models himself after Marjorie Taylor Greene, says he looks up to her and wants to do that, does not want to work across the aisle, doesn't see a point to it. Rarely does media outside of the conservative bubble, does not want to debate Marie Gluesenkamp Perez. This is a race where a lot is at stake. Jim Brunner just wrote an article about it this morning in The Seattle Times. Actually, he shared it - I'm not sure if he wrote it. But this is an important one for people to get engaged in. We've talked about the importance of - even if you don't live in a district, hey, why don't you adopt a district, make some phone calls, do some phone banking, get down there and canvass - do what you can. Don't let this slip away without doing everything possible. The Third Congressional District is traditionally a Republican district, but it's traditionally a Republican district that has elected Republicans like Jaime Herrera Beutler, who were nowhere near as extreme as Joe Kent. This is a closer race than we've seen there in quite some time. If enough people get involved and if enough people get engaged, who knows what could happen? Democrats seem energized down there. This is one where - don't let it go by without everyone pitching in and doing what they can to engage in that race. Any thoughts that you have on that one? [00:22:10] Mike McGinn: This race, yeah, it does highlight just where the Republican Party has been going. I think you see some of this in the Murray-Smiley race as well. I've been really impressed by the campaigning of the Democrat in the race and the way in which she's approaching the race. This is a district that is - it's a swing district, but it's a lean-R swing district, if that makes sense. It has the Portland suburbs, but it also has more rural areas as well. Yeah, maybe this - if this were on the East Coast, people would be looking at this as a bellwether of which way the trend is going in national politics. Who knows? Maybe we'll be able to tell a little bit from the East Coast about how this race might work out by the time they start announcing results from this coast. But really, I think the D in this race - she's run a really solid race, speaking directly to people's economic concerns as a small business owner as well. And there's this thing where reporters want to talk about partisanship or polarized politics or divisiveness. And yeah, I would say the electorate is polarized - there are a hell of a lot of folks nationwide who are going to pull the lever for candidates because they want to see Republicans have charge of the chamber, regardless of the shortcomings of the local candidate. It's a really fascinating phenomenon that's going on. But I'm going to make an argument that it's - the Democrats look a lot like candidates I've seen in the past running. And the Republicans don't, in my mind, in terms of the extremism that we start to see on whether or not the election was stolen. The number of election deniers that are out there for the last election - there's just no credible evidence that there was any voter fraud. It went in front of numerous, numerous courts. It went in front of judges appointed by Republicans and Democrats. There's just no evidence for this. And I don't know that the media knows how to handle this - that when you have one side that just denies reality and the other side is still operating mostly within the frame of U.S. politics, as I've seen it in the years I've been involved in U.S. politics, but they both-sides it so much. And I think this raises a great illustration of that. The Democrat is really a right down the middle-of-the-road type of politician, and the Republican here is espousing things that just aren't so, and it's one hell of a tight race down there, according to all the polls. And portraying this as Americans are divided or the politicians are polarizing doesn't capture what's going on. [00:25:19] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think that is a good point. What do you think, Bryce? [00:25:23] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah, I just wanted to weave back in something that Shannon mentioned earlier, which is that there are still people who live here and who vote here, who think that they live in Washington - they live in Western Washington - they're pretty safe from things. And I think this race is an important reminder that there are people running with these extreme views. There are these people running here in the state with really far-right priorities and goals. And this is a federal race, so it's gotten a lot of media attention, but it just highlights how important it is to pay attention to local races as well - races that for the State House and for State Senate and other positions - and just pay attention to what people are running on and making sure when we see people coming with extreme and dangerous views, that that's called out, that we let people know. Election Day is still in a few days. There's still opportunities to inform voters in this district about the candidates. There are still opportunities for voters who are really worried about rhetoric like this and candidates like this to get out there and talk to voters and inform them about this race. [00:26:32] Crystal Fincher: This conversation reminds me of one other thing, and actually was having a conversation about this as we were punditing on Kiro the other day. And there are some Republicans who are going - well, they're calling everybody extreme. Yeah, they're calling Joe Kent extreme, but they're also calling Tiffany Smiley extreme. And they're not the same extreme, but they're painting them with the same brush - you're hearing that for everybody, all the Republicans. If you say it about everybody, it's meaningless. And the challenge is, and the thing that the Republican Party has set up, is that they do have these extremists who are out further than a lot of the other Republicans that are elected, at least outwardly, right? And saying things that have been openly covered as white nationalism, Christian nationalism, that have been anti-Semitic, that have been racist, that have been homophobic, anti-trans, anti-gay - just very openly blatant right? And that is absolutely extreme. And no, not every Republican is outwardly openly saying that. They leave that to the Joe Kents and the Marjorie Taylor Greenes. But what is striking to me is how they have not been reined in by the people who have previously been considered as moderate and have previously been considered as the adults in the room. Those adults in the room are doing nothing to contain that extremist element in the party, and in fact, have given them more power, more visibility. The Republican Party, all of their caucuses have pumped money into these campaigns. Their allied PACs and supporters have pumped money into these campaigns and have been apologists for them. So if you will not rebuke when you hear those things said, if you will not stand up and say, you know what, I'm standing for these principles, and that person is not doing that, and we're both carrying the same label - I don't want to carry the same label as a person who is saying that - that is not what I stand for. We're not standing shoulder to shoulder. We're hearing none of that. We're hearing silence. And there are some people who want to interpret that silence as, well, clearly they don't agree. And when I talk to them, they sound perfectly reasonable, and they've been moderate in the past. We're hearing some of the most troubling things that we have in a while. Just the open anti-Semitism, the open racism, the open homophobia and transphobia that we're seeing is alarming. They're passing laws against it. This is not theoretical language. And we're seeing political violence as a direct result. That, of course, was predicted, right? When we hear speech like that, it incites violence. We have talked about it inciting violence, and it incited violence in multiple places, in multiple ways. And we've seen that just in the past couple of weeks - from January 6th to Nancy Pelosi to the Michigan governor - we're seeing this all over the place, right? And so silence is enabling violence. Silence is not moderation. It's enabling this extremism and violence. So yes, when you hear them all being painted with the same broad brush, it's because they're doing nothing to stop this rapid descent into this cesspool that we're on the precipice of, and that some states have already fallen to, right? It's important to vocally stand up against this, against hate, whenever we see it. And that's not a partisan statement. And if a party is trying to say that when you say that you need to call out violence, that you need to call out political violence, that you need to stand up and talk against anti-Semitism and call it what it is, and somehow they're putting a partisan label on that, be very wary of a party that says that speaking against those things is speaking against their party. They're telling you what the party is about if those things they're labeling as a partisan attack. I think that's very important to be said. This is so far beyond a Democratic and Republican issue, and we have to be aware that these Republicans are caucusing together, right? They're voting together for a national agenda, and we've heard this national agenda articulated. We've heard the things that they're queuing up. We've seen the types of policies that they're passing in places like Florida and Texas. We have the preview of what's coming there, and it is ugly, right? And ugly to people who used to consider themselves Republican. So to me, this is beyond the conversation of just Democrat and Republican. This is a conversation that we have to have before we even get to issues, because if we're leading with that hateful rhetoric and we're leading with that extremism, it really doesn't matter what someone is saying about issues, because the things that they are saying about people in their community is already excluding people and already doing that. I think that's extremely important to say, that we can't say that enough, and that trying to dismiss this extremism, and dismiss criticisms of it, and dismiss the refusal to call it out for what it is - is extremism itself. All right. So next on our ballot, we have the state races, starting with Secretary of State, which is a lively race. Now, we have talked a bunch about the Secretary of State race, and have also been posting a lot about it on the Hacks & Wonks Twitter account this week. So for that, between Democrat Steve Hobbs and Non-partisan Julie Anderson, we're going to refer you to those other shows. We'll put links in the show notes. We'll put links to the little audiograms and snippets that we have of the candidates' takes on different things. Steve Hobbs was a longtime Democratic senator known as a moderate for quite some time - and Julie Anderson actually just released a new ad that talks about that and him as a moderate. And then Julie Anderson has been the Pierce County auditor in Pierce County for 12 years, I believe now, and has built relationships around that area. So that's an interesting race to follow. We'll put those links in there, but that's the next one on the ballot. And then we get into the legislative races, which are going to be different depending on which legislative district that you're in. I just wanted to mention a few of the battleground districts here in the state. So one of them is in the 26th Legislative District Senate race - very important - between Emily Randall, Senator Emily Randall, and current Representative Jesse Young, who's running for that Senate seat. Emily's a Democrat with a strong record and has been representing that community and been in the community for quite some time. Jesse Young is one of the more extreme Republicans in our legislature, has - in the mold of the Matt Sheas, who made a lot of news for his activity in domestic terrorism. And if you think that sounds like a euphemism or like a stretch of the truth, I mean literal domestic terrorism like running a camp training people for war and putting tracking devices on law enforcement vehicles, and making threats to political opponents - extremism - and advancing bills to outlaw abortion in Washington state under threat of putting doctors in prison - that kind of extremism. And Jesse Young, as we talked about last week with Pierce County Council Chair Derek Young, has actually been suspended from working with legislative staff because of his past behavior and harassment or abuse. He is no longer permitted to have legislative staff, which is certainly hobbling in one's ability to get their job done. They lean very heavily on those staff. And so not being allowed to have one and having to do or not get done all of the administrative work, preparation work, ability to meet with constituents, ability to review and prepare legislation and represent the community is absolutely hobbled by that. But that is actually a really close race. Another one where it makes sense if you can adopt a race, that 26th Legislative District is a really important one where people can get involved with and make their voices heard. Also, the 47th Legislative District is a hotbed of activity - a competitive Senate race there - open seat left by the exiting Senator Mona Das and is being competed for by former State Senator, Democrat Claudia Kauffman and Republican Bill Boyce. This has been a purple district, a swing district, has elected both Democrats and Republicans. This district has a history of extremely close races. And so we have a race here where we're seeing some of the dynamics that we see in Democrat versus Republican races. Choice is a huge issue here. Bill Boyce - being bankrolled by far-right Republicans - has been giving really mushy responses about what he thinks about a woman's right to choose. And so that is certainly on the ballot, as well as just the history of corporate giveaways, tax - as was quoted in the paper - tax breaks and sweetheart deals given to rich developers and donors. And so certainly looking at the donor rolls there, you get a different story of who those legislators would be based on the activity there. So another very important partisan race. 42nd Legislative District, a very competitive race between Sharon Shewmake and Simon Sefzik - another Democrat versus Republican race - very important here for the Senate and just a variety of things. And again, we're seeing just greater space between the two parties. Here in the state, we, I think, have seen Republicans who have considered themselves moderate and who have been less eager to engage in some of the social wedge issue rhetoric that sometimes we see on a national basis. There have been Republicans who wore it as a badge of honor previously to say, no, that's not me. I'm focused on these other issues, but stand up. And whether it's being pro-choice, whether it is standing up for marriage equality. There have been some before here who have done that, some who haven't, but some who have. We are not seeing that now. Things are following the direction of some of the national races. And so we have that there. 30th Legislative District with Claire Wilson and Linda Kochmar, as well as the race between Jamila Taylor and Casey Jones are close - and so engaging in those is important. And then the 44th Legislative District with John Lovick, the Democrat who was previously a representative, currently a representative, now running to be a Senator, against Republican Jeb Brewer. Republican Mark Hamsworth for the House seat versus Brandy Donaghy, who was appointed to that seat and is running to fill the term, this new term. And then April Berg versus her Republican opponent. So pay attention to those races. Please make sure that you're engaging in these battlegrounds. And then we also have just Seattle races and - that we've covered. So in the 46th Legislative District, we have a classic Seattle moderate versus progressive race. Even though those, when you get into it, the labels might be a little bit simplistic, but certainly someone who seems more resistant to taxation, more resistant to change in Lelach Rave versus Darya Faravar, who wants to take more of an active approach in addressing issues like homelessness, housing affordability, and public safety - and move more in the direction of things that we've seen with the history of working versus those that have not. So that's a choice that we have there. We also have previously interviewed Darya, and so we'll link that in the show notes for your information. The 36th Legislative District features a race between Democrats Julia Reed and Jeff Manson. We've also interviewed both in that race. And we'll link that in the show notes. The 37th Legislative District is one where we did a primary candidate forum, have interviewed both of those candidates there - Democrat Chipalo Street and Democrat Emijah Smith. And we also did a debate in partnership with the South Seattle Emerald and others - hosted by the South Seattle Emerald - an in-person debate, actually. And we will link those there. I think that there are some interesting issues in that race, notable differences. We will also share kind of the lightning round stuff. But also, hey let's make sure that we're recognizing the full humanity of people and that we are not treating people who are in the LGBTQ community any differently than others. And that is an issue of difference in that race. So I encourage you all to do your homework about that and make sure that any candidate that you're voting for fully stands up for the rights of all people in our community. And that you communicate with the candidates about that and make sure all of your candidates know how important that is to you. And then we have the 34th Legislative District with Democrats Leah Griffin and Emily Alvarado. We've interviewed both of them. We'll link both of those shows in the show notes. So there are contested races throughout Seattle. Encourage you to vote in those races and make your choice. If you need help, refer to our show notes or to officialhacksandwonks.com. We have an Election 2022 page there and we'll put all of the resources on there. Next, we go to the County Prosecuting Attorney's race here in King County, that is between Jim Ferrell, who is the mayor of Federal Way, and Leesa Manion, who's the current Chief of Staff in the Prosecuting Attorney's Office. Jim Ferrell has been endorsed by folks like the King County Republican Party, some mayors, King County Council member Pete von Reichbauer, like the Covington and Algona mayor. Leesa Manion has been endorsed by the King County Democratic party, former governor Gary Locke, local labor unions. So there's a little bit of a difference in the profile of their supporters that kind of indicates the approach that they're looking to take. One, being more in line with some of the data that we're seeing in the most effective approaches to addressing crime and accountability - that has yielded some results in what we've seen, especially with youth crime and youth intervention, which seems to be particularly effective with Leesa Manion and her managing this office and hundreds of staff and attorney, which is certainly in line with what the County Prosecuting Attorney needs to do. Jim Ferrell, coming from the mayor of Federal Way, has talked about more of a punitive approach to this and is talking about cracking down on some of the things that we have been seeing as successful. It's interesting in how this race is shaping up and what the candidates are talking about and what they aren't talking about with them. Certainly Leesa has been leaning into her experience, the type of coalition that she's building, whether it's people who are in support of more common sense gun reform and making sure guns don't proliferate on the streets, to those who are looking to maintain accountability but make sure that we're doing the things that give folks the best chance of reducing recidivism, or people returning, or revictimizing people who are committing further crimes. Jim Ferrell seems very focused on trying to apply longer sentences, lengthier sentences, talking about a more, again, punitive approach, prosecuting more, longer sentences - that type of stuff. So with that, what do you think? What is your take on this race, Shannon? [00:44:01] Shannon Cheng: So this race is between Leesa Manion, who's the current Chief of Staff for the outgoing King County Prosecutor, Dan Satterberg - she's been in that position for quite a time. And her opponent is Jim Ferrell, who is the current mayor of Federal Way. So when I look at this race, I see - with Leesa Manion who - it's a continuation of what King County has been doing, which I would characterize as incremental reform of the criminal legal system to be more fair and equitable. I think this can be embodied in initiatives they aspire to, such as declaring racism as a public health crisis or the goal of Zero Youth Detention. So I think with Manion, you will get a continuation of the slow work that the county is doing to try to make our criminal legal system more equitable and fair. Whereas with Ferrell, I see this as a candidate who's trying to throw us back to punitive tactics that have been proven to be ineffective. He wants to be more tough-on-crime and is riding this wave of Republicans pointing to crime as being the reason not to support the Democratic candidate. I think that Ferrell has specifically spoken about being against and wanting to roll back some of the diversion programs that King County has started to try to use, especially for youth. And I also - even if you don't - if you agree on this punitive approach, I think it's also worth considering that right now the legal system is kind of at capacity. So what Ferrell is suggesting is going to put even more strain on it. The courts are already - have backlogs coming from the pandemic and the jails are full and not functioning well and not providing people humane conditions to be in there. So I just fear that that will lead to a lot more suffering for many people across our county. And I think this is a really important race to look at and think about. [00:46:12] Crystal Fincher: So Mike, what's your take on this? [00:46:14] Mike McGinn: It's interesting to see the contrast here. It's a local version of this national debate that we have now seen - that the proper response to crime is to crack down harder. And we're seeing this here as well. I worked with Dan Satterberg and he was a really interesting elected official. And honestly, to me, I may not have agreed with him on every decision - I know I didn't agree with him on every decision he made. But he was a civil servant first and foremost. He was trying to figure out what was the right path forward. He was engaged in the discussion. He led on things like Law Enforcement Assisted Diversion, people returning to the community from jail - getting their records cleared and restoration of rights. So he was really, and it's interesting, he was elected as a Republican, moved the race to a nonpartisan race and then was elected as a Democrat. So he clearly was somebody who was willing to go where the evidence led and not go based on ideology. So that's the experience we've had from that office, which is, I think, what you want in a prosecutor's office. It's a pretty important position. The effect it has on people's lives is immense. I think that really says something that we see someone looking to continue that tradition. And then we see someone coming in with - if only we punished people more. How's that been working? Really? We have some information on that, which is it doesn't really work. It takes a combination of the judicial system and community systems to really try to deal with root causes of crime, to deal with recidivism, to deal with the issues here. And I think that this is a little bit of a bellwether here. Are we going to try to be a progressive place, a progressive county that adopts and looks at new approaches? Or are we going to go to a more regressive approach to this? Because, yeah, that's worked so well in solving crime over the decades. [00:48:34] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think so. What's your take, Bryce? [00:48:37] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah, I don't know how much more I have to add to this other than just the importance of this race and the importance of making sure we have somebody who's really thinking about the - not just people's emotional concerns about crime, but the actions and the strategies and the programs that have been proven to address the things that actually lower crime. We've talked on a number of different episodes throughout this year about programs that have successfully reduced recidivism. And those are programs that often get criticized by people who claim to be tough on crime. And I just think that's something to interrogate our candidates about for this position, because the county prosecutor has a lot of influence in terms of how the county addresses crime in a way that's going to impact real people in big ways. [00:49:29] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I agree. I will chime in and say that we just got a new public poll here that was just reported on, I think yesterday, showing that this race is basically statistically tied. So turnout is going to be really important. Lots of people talk about - they look at the federal races - they wonder if their vote matters. They're going, okay millions of people are voting. Why does mine make a difference? Really what makes a difference are these down-ballot races, are these local races. If you care about the issues of homelessness, justice, equity, affordability, what our community looks like, who it serves - our criminal legal system is an essential part of that equation. And we're talking about, in so many of these conversations, how we intervene and address victims. And most people who have perpetrated crimes have been victims of them. And how we intervene when people are victims, especially early, and especially when they're young, dictates how their future goes and whether they end up on the path to criminalization and poverty or a better path. So the way we intervene in that makes a difference. The way we treat and handle these cases that come through and how we address accountability depends on whether our streets are made safer, whether our tax dollars are used in a way that makes it less likely that people are going to commit crime and less likely that people are victimized or more, right? And we're seeing the impacts of the status quo of a more punitive approach. And either we choose to keep doing the same thing, and polls keep showing that no one is satisfied with the condition of things today. And so we do need to consider that when we are making these choices. And I hope you take a long, hard look at that. And most of all, get engaged and vote, make sure other people vote. And talk about these races, talk about the county attorney races, talk about the judicial races that we're going to talk about in just a moment, right? These are very important. Turnout is not where we would love it to be. It's lagging behind some previous years here locally, especially among younger people. And I know that is concerning to some. So the more that people can do to make sure that everyone can - and the most impactful thing you can do is just text those close to you, call those close to you, talk to them. Hey, coworker - hey, did you get that ballot in? What are you doing for this race? Remember, this is important. Hey, cousin, hey, brother, sister, mom - it's those connections close to you and those personal contacts that actually make it more likely for those people to vote. External organizations can try and do all the voter mobilization that they can and that work is valuable and good and should happen. But hearing from someone who you care about and who cares about you saying, hey, make sure you do this, you have any questions, you need help - is one of the best things you can do to make sure that people actually turn out to vote. So with that, we can talk about a couple of these judicial races, which are next on the ballot. Now we see the state Supreme Court races and we see Justice Mary Yu, who - you probably hear affection and admiration in my voice because I have affection and admiration for Justice Mary Yu. We also have a great interview with her from a few months back that we will post in the episode notes. Justice Barbara Madsen, also wonderful. Justice Helen Whitener, who is just - look, I'm going to just go ahead and get personal. Justice Helen Whitener is everything. I just need everyone to know that Justice Whitener is everything from - just everything. Her experience - vast, broad experience - in so many elements and areas of the law. The thoughtfulness, the lived experience, the outreach into the community - just a beautiful human being and an effective and intelligent justice. I am a fan of Justice Helen Whitener and we've done a couple interviews with Justice Whitener. And fortunately this time she isn't being challenged by anyone mediocre like she was last time, so this is an uncontested race. And when I say mediocre - I mean just got his license to practice law in order to run against someone with a resume as vast and deep as Justice Whitener's. And so now we'll talk about the contested municipal judge races in the City of Seattle between Damon Shadid, who is the incumbent in that one seat - has been endorsed by a number of Democratic organizations, received Exceptionally Well Qualified by a number of organizations, and is standing on his record. And a new challenger from the City Attorney's Office, Nyjat Rose-Akins, who is endorsed by the King County Republican Party and Jenny Durkan, and is wanting to make changes to some things and talking about the record of Community Court and changes that she wants to make there. In the other race, we have judge Adam Eisenberg, who has been rated Exceptionally Well Qualified by a number of the local and ethnic bar associations, but also has received a high number of negative feedback and surveys from the King County Bar Association and concerns about management and whether women are treated fairly under his management. And then Pooja Vaddadi, who is a newcomer and a new challenger, who has been - received a number of Democratic endorsements, but also has not received any ratings from local judicial bar associations because she has chosen not to stand in front of them for ratings. Bryce, how would you characterize those races? [00:55:42] Bryce Cannatelli: Like Crystal said, we got to hear from all of these candidates in a forum. I'll start with the Damon Shadid and Nyjat Rose-Akins portion of it - they're running for Position 7. Damon Shadid has been a judge in this position for quite a while. And the main point of difference between the two is Nyjat Rose-Akins often talked about during the forum criticisms of Community Court and her interest in making a lot of changes to the Community Court system, whereas Judge Shadid has defended what that court has been able to do and hopes to see it continue in its current direction. As far as Pooja Vaddadi and Judge Eisenberg, that's another kind of longtime incumbent in the position - I can't remember how long he's been in that role - and a newcomer. And Pooja Vaddadi brought up concerns about the way that Judge Eisenberg has handled himself in the courtroom. You can hear her talk about that in our forum specifically at the end - is something that her campaign has been highlighting as of late, but also just the need that she claims there is in the municipal court for some changes. [00:56:52] Crystal Fincher: What's your take on those races, Shannon? [00:56:55] Shannon Cheng: So I think - so for the Judge Eisenberg and Pooja Vaddadi race - Pooja Vaddadi is a practicing public defender. And I think her experience in being in the court with somebody such as Judge Eisenberg presiding - it was a maybe not great experience for her. And so she saw a lot of injustice there and felt called to try to step up and bear witness and call out what was happening and how she has a different vision for how that court could be run. I personally appreciate that because I think judicial races are just very low information. It's really hard - as Crystal just went through, there was a long list of uncontested judges on the ballot - and I often look at those names and I have no idea who those people are. And so it has been interesting in this race to get a window into how courts work. And I know for me, it's been very educational. And I continue to aspire to learn more about how courts are run and what matters. And yeah, so for the Damon Shadid and Nyjat Rose-Akins - as Bryce said, I think it comes down to the vision of how Community Court will be run in the future in Seattle. Whether you want somebody from the City Attorney's Office driving the vision of how to handle low-level offenses in the city versus the path that we had been on to to try to support people in need and not further entangle them in a system that kind of - a system that can snowball on people's lives. [00:58:41] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think that's right on. And I think in these races, we are seeing a little bit of a difference. There has been a lot called out by Pooja Vaddadi's campaign. But in fairness, I think you referred to Pooja talking about how she was partly moved to run for this position based on some of the injustices she saw. But one of the issues in this race that has been brought up is that Judge Eisenberg was the recipient of the highest number of - basically highest amount of negative feedback. King County Bar Association does an anonymous poll of its member attorneys for judges and the highest percentage of attorneys returned negative responses for Judge Eisenberg - higher than all of the other judges and gave that feedback. Judge Eisenberg didn't seem to feel that that had any validity. And he talked about how he had been rated Exceptionally Well Qualified, which is the highest rating given by a number of different bar associations. And it being pretty standard that judges go before different bar associations and get interviewed and they evaluate their fitness for judicial office and provide a rating from Exceptionally Well Qualified, I think Very Well Qualified, just on there. And so he had a number of highest ratings. And Pooja Vaddadi decided not to sit in front of those. And she said it was because she felt that it was biased or tilted or they would automatically give high ratings to incumbents, but not give high ratings to people who weren't incumbents. So she didn't feel the need to sit before them, which is a bit different. A lot of first-time candidates do go before those bodies and are evaluated and come out with decent ratings. I'm trying to think if I recall first-time candidates getting Exceptionally Well Qualified - I think I recall a couple, but also some who haven't. So I don't know, there very well may be a role that incumbency plays in that, but that was an element in that race that came through. As well as prior coverage about whether Judge Eisenberg potentially gave someone a harsher sentence for exercising their right to a jury trial instead of accepting a plea deal. And that being a wrong thing - that is a right that people have to exercise. And whether someone pleads guilty to a charge on a deal or is found guilty on that charge, penalizing someone simply for choosing to go to trial is not something that should happen and is certainly frowned upon. And so there was some coverage in question about that. We can also link that in the show notes. So those are certainly interesting races. And I think Shannon summed up really well just what's at stake moving forward in the Damon Shadid and Nyjat Rose-Akins race. So now let's get into the meat of a Seattle big-time initiative - Propositions 1A and 1B, which are on the City of Seattle ballot. They are not on my ballot, but we've got ballots waving with Shannon and Bryce and Mike over here talking about this question. [01:02:10] Mike McGinn: Do you want me to take a shot at it? [01:02:11] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, go ahead. Take a shot at it, Mike McGinn. [01:02:16] Mike McGinn: Okay. We all know how ballots work - you get a choice between - in the primary, you normally get a whole lot of candidates to vote for and you pick one. And what this is proposing is that in the City of Seattle, whether you want a different way to vote that will give you more choices. So the first question is, and let me tell you what the two choices are. One is called approval voting. So you'd look at your ballot and you'd have multiple people on the ballot and anyone that you approved of, you'd vote for. So you could vote for one, two, three, four, to approve as many as you want. And the idea there is that you don't want to have to restrict your vote to one candidate. And I have to say there have been times when I've had multiple friends on the ballot - I just want to be able to say I voted for all of them. But there are other good reasons to want to maybe approve multiple candidates. The other style is something called ranked choice voting. So in that case, you'd rank the candidates - one, two, three, four, five. And they'd add up the votes, and whoever the lowest vote getter was would get dropped off. And so let's say - I'm standing here with Bryce and Shannon and Crystal - let's say I had ranked them Crystal first, and then Bryce, and then Shannon. If Crystal was the lowest vote getter, she'd be off the list. And my vote would now go to Bryce - my second vote would be counted. And you do this by a process of eliminating the lowest-ranked candidate until you get to a winner. And we'll probably get more into why - what are the differences between the two systems and why they're better. And there's a whole world of election nerddom, which is substantial - what is the best way to represent what the voters really want, but you're going to get to choose here. So the real question is, do you want to keep the existing system - and that's the first question on the ballot - or do you want a new system? And if you vote Yes, I want a new system, you'll also be asked - well, actually, no matter how you vote on whether you want a new system - you're then asked, which one do you like more, approval voting or ranked choice voting? So yeah, it is pretty dense and complicated. You probably want to sit down and look at this. But if I could break it down for you - if you think you want more ways to have your vote count and have more discretion in how to award it to people, you'll want to vote Yes on the initial question. And then you'll get to weigh in and decide which one of those two - approval or ranked choice voting - you like more. And that'll tee it up for people to offer their opinions on what they like more on the rest of the podcast. How was that? Did I do okay, guys, in getting the description out? [01:05:13] Crystal Fincher: You did! You did, in fact, do okay of getting the description out. And I think also just the - functionally on the ballot - what you said was really important and I just want to reiterate. So this - we're talking about - okay, there are two choices there, approval voting and ranked choice voting. But when you get your ballot, you're going to see that it is constructed in a way that's not just that simple choice. There really is an initial question and then a secondary question. The initial question - why don't you just read what's on the ballot? [01:05:47] Bryce Cannatelli: Yeah, I could do that. I can also hold it up to you, so you can see the wall of text that happens beforehand. Shannon is shaking her head on the video feed, because - Seattle voters will know it if they've opened their ballots - there's a lot of text that goes before you can actually answer the question. So please read your ballot from top to bottom to make sure that you vote for everything. But the way that it's formatted is we get an explanation of both of the individual propositions. So it says Proposition 1A, submitted by initiative petition number 134, and Proposition 1B, alternative proposed by the city council and mayor, concern allowing voters to select multiple candidates in city primary elections. Proposition 1A would allow voters in primary elections for mayor, city attorney and city council to select on the ballot as many candidates as they approve of for each office. The two candidates receiving the most votes for each office would advance to the general election consistent with state law. The city would consult with King County to include instructions on the primary ballot, such as vote for as many as you approve of for each office. As an alternative, the city council and mayor have proposed Proposition 1B, which would allow primary election voters for mayor, city attorney and

As part of our ongoing rebroadcasts of interviews with candidates in key races, get to know the incredible state representatives from the 5th LD, Bill Ramos and Lisa Callan! If you've come 8th CD to canvass for Congresswoman Dr. Kim Schrier, you've probably also been in the 5th LD, so this is a great introduction to these two wonderful lawmakers who are up for reelection. Show Notes: Bill Ramos's website: voteramos.org Lisa Callan's website: lisacallan.org

KVI's John Carlson interviews Republican candidate for US Congress, Matt Larkin, running against incumbent Rep. Dr. Kim Schrier in the Washington 8th District. Topics include inflation, abortion access, why Congressional Democrats and Pres. Biden are like George Costanza on the TV show "Seinfeld".

6am hour -- Pres. Joe Biden complains about others lying for political gain but ignores his own history of exaggerations and lies as well as those of other top Democrats, on this day in history 6 months ago, nobody in the Beltway/DC news media eco-system seems interested in tracking this unprecedented story, GUEST: candidate for Kitsap Co. district court judge, Shane Seaman, joins the show to talk about an unusual battle between him and his election challenger, Seaman's an attorney from Poulsbo, final question for the candidate: why are so many elections for judge uncontested with no challengers? 7am hour -- GUEST: KVI's Lone Star State correspondent, Kirby Wilbur, talks about the fate of the US Senate control amid the 2022 general election, Democrats taking their lumps in new polls, some election predictions; those cheatin' Houston Astros throw a combined no-hitter in a unique moment of World Series history, the RCP analyst polling guy responds to an MSNBC polling analyst calling Republican polls "propaganda", GUEST: Republican candidate for Congress, Vince Cavaleri, talks to KVI about challenging incumbent Susan Del Bene, how the size of the 1st WA Congressional district impacts this urban/rural district, several WA sheriffs are urging voters to consider public safety at the ballot box. 8am hour -- GUEST: Republican Congressional candidate, Matt Larkin, talks about the 8th WA District race coming down to the wire, how incumbent Dr. Kim Schrier is clinging to the abortion issue for re-election, Larkin responds to political attack ads claiming he'll defund or gut money for the Veterans Administration; White House deletes tweet that was intended to promote increase in Social Security money starting next year, Barack Obama heckled in Phoenix campaigning for Democratic candidates has a rough time, CNN polling guy paints an ugly picture for Democrats in the general election, MSNBC polling analyst calls prominent polls "Republican propaganda", the moment Tiffany Smiley catapulted her campaign from long-shot to maybe she can win this thing, "some political climate change coming your way".

Just outside Seattle in Washington's 8th district, there's a tight race playing out in the midterms.Democratic incumbent Kim Schrier is up against Republican Matt Larkin for a seat that could shift control of Congress.Historically the 8th has voted red, but that changed in 2018 with Schrier's win, and now it looks like it's up for grabs again.KUOW political reporter David Hyde is here to bring us up to speed on this race.We can only make Seattle Now because listeners support us. Make the show happen by making a gift to KUOW: http://bit.ly/seattlenowAnd we want to hear from you! Follow us on Instagram at SeattleNowPod, or leave us feedback online: https://www.kuow.org/feedback

GUEST: WA State Representative. Kim Schrier // GEE & URSULA AGREE TO DISAGREE // WE HEAR YOU! and WORDS TO LIVE BYSee omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What's Trending: When will the smoky air leave, debate over whether the COVID shot should be recommended for children and a deaf woman had teeth removed without her knowledge. // 8th district candidates Matt Larkin and Dr. Kim Schrier talk about the key issues ahead of the election, a panel of diverse voters don't want Joe Biden to run in 2024. // Rantz and Keith Olbermann got into a twitter spat and the NYC Mayor tries to minimize crime in his city.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

3PM - This Lacey high school offers a class on sports officiating, hopes students can help offset shortage // WA police chief objects to Democratic PAC using his photo in Rep. Kim Schrier ads // ‘I Strongly Believe In Second Chances': NYC Restaurant Owner Will Un-Ban James Corden On One Condition // U.S. committee recommends COVID shot for CDC's free vaccine program // LETTERS See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Covington Police Chief's photo being used in Kim Schrier's ad//Amazon Prime's coverage of NFL games//Mackenzie Scott's continued charity benefits the Girl Scouts.See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

A discussion with Congresswoman Dr. Kim Schrier and a political expert about this important Congressional race. A note GOP challenger Matt Larkin declined to be interviewed.

A discussion with Congresswoman Dr. Kim Schrier and a political expert about this important Congressional race. A note GOP challenger Matt Larkin declined to be interviewed.

A discussion with Congresswoman Dr. Kim Schrier and a political expert about this important Congressional race. A note GOP challenger Matt Larkin declined to be interviewed.

A discussion with Congresswoman Dr. Kim Schrier and a political expert about this important Congressional race. A note GOP challenger Matt Larkin declined to be interviewed.

What's Trending: Rantz: Dozens of crimes committed during Patty Murray's Seattle public safety photo op, the Seattle Times has a hit piece on Joe Kent and following up on a school incident at Edmonds-Woodway.Big Local: a Sedro-Woolley farmer is charged with killing elk on his own property, a reward is being offered for info on who poisoned wolves in Eastern Washington and SeaTac now has the highest minimum wage in the country. // Kim Schrier talks about her campaign in the 8th district See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Hour 1 -- a very late ferry sailing this morning alters the start of the John Carlson Show, Democrats "mis-played" the Martha's Vineyard/detained migrants saga, over 2 million people caught so far this year illegally crossing into US, the "absolute joke of a Sheriff" in Texas tries to score political points over the Martha's Vineyard story, new data: Biden Administration has sent 78 flights of detained migrants into Jacksonville FL, NBC polling says 47% of Americans think Biden has made the economy worse (only 23% think Biden makes the economy better), guess the price of a family size box of Cheerios at a north Seattle grocery store??, Seattle politicians are now pushing a tax hike for city parks after various homeless problems (hiring more Park Rangers to interdict homeless and repair facilities/grounds after homeless damage), Hour 2 -- GUEST: Republican candidate for WA-8 US Congress, Matt Larkin--challenging incumbent Rep. Dr. Kim Schrier, how the Seattle Left-wing is trying to influence the 8th District election for the incumbent, how Seattle politics are infiltrating the suburban/rural 8th WA Congressional district, Larkin says the big issue voters are telling him about: "three-to-one its inflation", Larkin adds that fentanyl over-doses and trafficking can be reduced with tougher US border policy if he's elected to Congress, does the SCOTUS abortion law ruling on Dobbs give Rep. Schrier momentum in the 8th District?, GUEST: Yakima ER doctor, Raul Garcia M.D., talks about Biden's comment "the pandemic is over", talks about nurse and doctor "burn out", Garcia explains why so many WA hospitals are packed with patients and also short on nurses/doctors, Garcia says it all comes back to travel pay, says keeping people in fear about COVID will protect political power, Hour 3 -- King Co. Executive finally responds to independent reporter Jonathan Choe's question(s) about the quietly proposed SoDo homeless complex, Dow Constantine's first public words about the proposed homeless shelter that has stirred opposition from CID neighbors, red flags for a "basic income" trial approved for homeless women/transgender/non-binary living in Denver CO shelters, CNN's Don Lemon doesn't get the response he expected from his guest after a question about slavery reparations, the reparations question dovetails with the #1 movie right now "Woman King" about a regiment of 19th century African (Dahomey) female warriors, the historical context of slavery and what we know as cancel culture.

This race in the 8th the most closely watched in the state, so our discussion centers on Dr. Schrier's many achievements during her last four years in office, as well as recent Democratic victories like the passage of the Inflation Reduction Act and what it delivers on climate, prescription drug costs, and tax equity. We also talk about the importance of keeping Democrats in office to protect reproductive freedom and even our very democracy. Don't miss this one!

On this midweek show, we present Part 1 of the Hacks & Wonks 2022 Post-Primary Election Recap which was live-streamed on August 9, 2022 with special guests EJ Juárez and Doug Trumm. In Part 1, the panel breaks down primary election results in the 3rd and 8th Congressional Districts before moving on to battleground districts for State Legislature seats in the 26th and 30th LDs. Stay tuned for Part 2 of the recap releasing this Friday for more primary analysis! As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter at @HacksWonks. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-hosts, EJ Juárez at @EliseoJJuarez and Doug Trumm at @dmtrumm. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources Hacks & Wonks 2022 Primary Election Recap Livestream | August 9th, 2022: https://www.officialhacksandwonks.com/august-2022-postprimary-recap   Transcript   [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show we talk with Policy Wonks and Political Hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work, with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening and what you can do about it. You're listening to part 1 of our 2022 Post-Primary Election Recap, with special guests EJ Juárez and Doug Trumm, which we live-streamed on August 9th, 2022. You'll get part 2 in your feed this Friday, August 19th, in place of our regular week-in-review episode. You can find the audio and full transcript for this recap on our website, officialhacksandwonks.com. Thank you for listening! Good evening, and welcome to the Hacks & Wonks Post-Primary Election Recap. I'm Crystal Fincher - I'm a political consultant and the host of the Hacks & Wonks podcast. And today I'm thrilled to be joined by three of my favorite Hacks and Wonks to break down what happened in last week's primary election. Before we begin tonight, I'd like to do a land acknowledgement. I'd like to acknowledge that we are on the traditional land of the first people of Seattle, the Coast-Salish peoples, specifically the Duwamish People, past and present. I would like to honor with gratitude the land itself and the Duwamish Tribe. We're excited to be able to live stream this recap on Twitter, Facebook and YouTube. Additionally, we're recording this recap for broadcast on KODX and KVRU radio, podcast, and it will be available with a full text transcript at officialhacksandwonks.com. We invite our audience to ask questions of our panelists. If you're watching a live stream online, then you can ask questions by commenting on the livestream. You can also text your questions to 206-395-6248. That's 206-395-6248, and that number will scroll at the bottom of the screen. Our esteemed panelists for the evening are EJ Juárez. EJ is a public servant who remains involved in numerous political efforts across Washington. In his day job, he's the Director of Equity and Environmental Justice for the Department of Natural Resources. He leads that agency's work to reduce health and economic disparities through environmental justice practices. He previously served as the first Public Policy Manager for the Group Health Foundation, where he led the work to create that organization's political and legislative portfolio after serving in leadership posts at the Seattle Library and as the Executive Director at Progressive Majority and ColorPAC, organizations dedicated to recruiting, training, and electing progressive champions in Washington and Oregon. Thank you so much - welcome. [00:03:01] EJ Juárez: Thanks for having me. I'm excited to be here. [00:03:03] Crystal Fincher: Excellent. And next we have Doug Trumm. Doug is the Executive Editor of The Urbanist and serves on The Urbanist Elections Committee, which crafts the organization's endorsements. An Urbanist writer since 2015, he dreams of pedestrianizing streets, blanketing the city in bus lanes, and unleashing an eco-friendly mass timber building spree to end the affordable housing shortage and avert our coming climate catastrophe. He graduated from the Evans School of Public Policy and Governance at the University of Washington. He lives in East Fremont and loves to explore the city by bike, foot, or bus. Welcome, Doug Trumm. Great to have you - so we are having a little bit of technical difficulties with Doug, he will join us back again as soon as he's able, but we'll get started with EJ Juárez. Starting off - I think we can start with the Congressional races, where just yesterday - in the 3rd Congressional District, which is in Southwest Washington - we saw Jaime Herrera Beutler concede. And so Joe Kent, the Republican, is finishing in second place in the primary - proceeding to go to the general election against Marie Gluesenkamp Perez, who is the Democrat in that race and finished first. What did you see happening in this? Did you expect Joe Kent to make it through? And what does this mean for what this race is gonna look like in the general election? [00:04:37] EJ Juárez: So I'll be honest and say no - I did not expect Joe Kemp to make it through. I think I had more faith in Southwest Washington, honestly. This is a situation where - I think conventional wisdom had most of the energy focused on Jaime - how were folks going to make the case that Jaime needed to be replaced? And unfortunately for Jaime, that meant everybody was really against her and the results prove that. My big concern moving forward - and I think things that I'm gonna be watching for is - is this a Democratic operation in that district that can pull through and actually deliver a field strategy, that can deliver on the fundraising and the hopes of the strategy of what the national Democrats have been doing - is supporting these Trump conspiracy theorists over more moderate candidates in the hopes that Democrats pull through and take them out in the general. This is one where it's really gonna be - is Nancy Pelosi's strategy gonna play out the way they hope. [00:05:42] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, this is gonna be really interesting. There was a lot of late money that came in in support of Jaime Herrera Beutler. There was a lot of talk that she wasn't very visible throughout the end of that campaign and so it - that may have had something to do with it. But I think the GOP electorate is pretty fractured. And this is one - we'll talk about several others coming up - but one of a number of races where the party establishment made it known what their preference was, put resources and a big push behind their candidates, and it actually didn't quite land. Their voters said that's actually not our choice and went a different direction and Jaime Herrera Beutler has been known as - it's interesting to say "moderate Republican," but more moderate than her counterparts, I think is fair. She had that reputation, but had been pushed further to the right kind of in response to where the base is this time, but not far enough. Joe Kent is in the race, he's Trump-endorsed, he is a frequent guest on the Sean Hannity program, he thinks that Jim Jordan should take over as leader of the party in place of Kevin McCarthy, he said that he's going to immediately call for Joe Biden's impeachment and investigate the 2020 election, he does not believe in support for Ukraine, defended calling President Zelenskyy a thug - just has a number of beliefs that seem like they aren't in line with where the GOP has traditionally been, certainly different than where the majority of residents in the state are if you look at all available polling. But he cobbled together a coalition that made it through the primary. Do you think that Republicans are going to coalesce behind him, Doug? [00:07:40] Doug Trumm: I think ultimately they will. And I guess it depends how many people are dyed-in-the-wool Republicans in that district, because I think the sort of structural problem maybe that the state GOP is running into is just that the more they make their brand true to that base that elected Joe Kent, the less that they're appealing to the swing independent voters. So I don't know what to make - I think Republicans ultimately might come home, but they might lose a few folks who just - disgusted about the whole thing about her losing her seat. But it seems like there's been an incredible amount of brand loyalty throughout a near coup, so I don't know when to expect a huge exodus, but just a little bit of bleeding in that district would - could end up being costly. [00:08:35] Crystal Fincher: Do you think they're gonna be able to effectively moderate, EJ? [00:08:42] EJ Juárez: I'm gonna go with no. I'm sitting here thinking of what it must be like to be a Republican who shows up to your county Republican meeting in this moment where you have such dissatisfaction - both with your options, your party apparatus and strategy - where literally, there is no consensus. And when we talk about - how are Republicans gonna activate their base, I'm not convinced Republicans know who their base are in this moment. And it shifts in every district based on every candidate and the lack of consistency there - one, makes their money less effective, right? You're not operating in scale and you're not operating with the mass kind of penetration that you can get when you have a consistent messaging strategy that is born out of multiple cycles of races. So I think it's messy, and I think that this race in particular really is a great illustrative moment for what happened in the legislative races and what we're seeing across Washington State right now - where you cannot get Republicans on-brand, which is so wild to me given the past 30 years of rigid brand management. [00:09:54] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, definitely. It's going to be very interesting to see just how that turns out. And I've certainly been asked recently - well, Joe Kent is a different kind of Republican, not the traditional kind of Republican we've seen elected here in Washington State. Does that mean that Marie Gluesenkamp Perez has a chance to win this race? This is a district where Jaime Herrera Beutler previously won it with 56% of the vote, I believe it was. Donald Trump won it with just under 51% to Joe Biden's around 48%. So this is certainly a district that at least leans Republicans if not more. Does the Democrat have a shot, do you think, Doug? [00:10:42] Doug Trumm: Absolutely. A lot of race still to happen, but I would not be feeling confident if I was just assuming that was going to be a safe R seat. Just the impact of that particular issue - and Jaime Herrera Beutler's been there a long time, so I'm sure there's some loyalists who are a little bit offended that that's how her career ended. So I don't know - it's just, like you said, it's messy. And the brand is just murky right now and so much of it's driven just by anger and backlash - that's a very crude tool to wield. It's effective in motivating people, but you don't know which direction they're gonna go. And if just the conservative media apparatus is just - it completely runs on that type of thing and it's unwieldy. [00:11:40] EJ Juárez: I'll just jump in briefly - I agree with Doug. I think the challenge here is that in any other year, if you were gonna look at the Democrat in that race and say you pulled less than 34%, that's not a good number to build from. And that's a really tough place to find a strategy and a foothold. I think that given the uniqueness of the challenger who's making it through to the general, it throws that playbook out. And we're gonna see over the next month - I think these next 30 days are gonna be really telling over just how much get up and go those local Democrats have in order to make up those percentages. [00:12:20] Crystal Fincher: I agree. And so we'll move to the 8th Congressional District race, which is a bit further north - parts of a few different counties, including King County - that saw Kim Schrier, who is the current incumbent Democrat, finish with a pretty strong result. And had some strong challengers in terms of Republicans who were duking it out - so you had Reagan Dunn, Matt Larkin, and Jesse Jensen all competing on the Republican side, with Matt Larkin making it through. What do you make of this result, EJ? And what do you think it says about where Republicans are at, even in King County? [00:13:03] EJ Juárez: I think it says a lot about Reagan Dunn. I really do. I think that to be perhaps the most high-profile Republican in King County and maybe in that entire district and have that showing really shows - I think it says a lot about both his candidacy and viability for further office, but ultimately his track record and what he's been able to accomplish. Matt Larkin, a relatively unknown Republican coming in, being able to beat a sitting County Councilmember in this contested primary - definitely bad news for establishment Republicans in this moment. [00:13:46] Crystal Fincher: Certainly not what a lot of people predicted. What do you think the general election's gonna look like in this race, Doug? [00:13:53] Doug Trumm: It does have the makings of a squeaker. When I was looking on election night, I was optimistic and I think - if I'm recalling correctly - that Kim Schrier's lead's just eroded a little bit and maybe that's just the rural parts of the district are seeing less of that traditional King County progressive swing at the end. But she still does have, I think, the upper hand and with the higher-profile candidate not making it through again, you have the case of - is the party going to be really excited getting behind Larkin the way they may have for Dunn, as the anointed dynasty son or whatever. And it just goes to show again - they're just having a really hard time picking candidates in the way that they easily used to - anoint the successor and get a candidate through who had all the connections and all the money. Larkin might find that with this sort of being a high-profile race for control of the House, but it certainly isn't what they'd planned. [00:15:02] Crystal Fincher: Does not appear to be what they planned. And it seems like Reagan Dunn and Jesse Jensen were really concerned with going after each other and not really paying attention to Matt Larkin. It seemed, or at least he seemed to duck a lot of the crossfire going back and forth. Do you think that might have contributed to him making it through - just that he wasn't in-between the whole mud slinging battle? [00:15:28] Doug Trumm: Yeah, that seems to be the case. And Reagan Dunn was just doing so much to try to rebrand himself. And maybe that just wasn't a great idea because a lot of the King County Republicans tried to make this moderate brand that they thought would be - and probably that would play - better in the county. But then knowing that he had this primary, suddenly he's taking these votes where he's reaffirming he's anti-abortion, anti-choice and taking these County Council votes where, if he wasn't in that race, you feel like he might have voted differently. And I don't know if voters also just react negatively that kind of like finger-to-the-wind opportunism. Just be yourself sometimes can get you some points that being a little too smart by half might actually cost you. [00:16:24] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I think so. I think this was interesting - also the Senate race with Tiffany Smiley and Patty Murray was interesting - in that, especially this 8th Congressional District race, was one that Republicans really thought was - they were going to have, I think certainly a stronger showing than this, that they were expecting Kim Schrier to be a little bit more vulnerable than she turned out to be. And looking at some of these other races where they thought - Hey, these are big opportunities for pickups - and not only did it not turn out very well percentage-wise, but their preferred candidates didn't even make it through. I think both of you alluded to some of the message discipline challenges that they're having. And a lot of times we've talked about - Hey, Democrats' messages are, may have some issues and stuff. They seem to actually be pretty effective that the Democratic results were fairly strong compared to what expectations were going in, and Republicans seemed to struggle. And you just talked about Reagan Dunn having a challenge with talking about where he's at in terms of abortion rights. He before had tried to be a moderate, this time it seemed like he really initially and in the middle there felt like he needed to say - yeah, absolutely I'm pro-life, I personally don't believe in abortion and don't want that. And with the Dobbs decision - Republicans could say that before, certainly more than if you had - I don't think that Washington residents, feeling that they had protections federally plus in the state, really felt like there was a vulnerability and so just let that slide. I don't think that was the case this time. And I heard Reagan Dunn in one interview say - yeah, that happened federally, but here in this state, abortion is settled law - which is literally what we heard Justice Kavanaugh say, what we heard a number of Congresspeople say before that right was eliminated at the federal level. So there just isn't confidence or comfort that that is settled law and it seems like Republicans are a bit flatfooted. And realistically, just not in-step with the 65 or so percent of the public that strongly favors abortion rights. How do you think they handle that issue in the primary? And what does that say for how things will look in the general? [00:18:59] EJ Juárez: I'll jump in first here. I think it feeds into this idea that I think Republicans have been happily beating the drum on of - everything's fine, except for we're gonna oppose everything that might not make it fine - in this divorced-from-reality narrative of - as long as we hold the line, it can't get worse and we're not actively participating in that. And at the same time, 65+%, 78+% of the actual electorate are saying - we are totally on the other side of this issue than you, and you've missed the boat. And it doesn't take much for a voter to look at candidates, frankly like Reagan Dunn, who have that record or others who have public statements like Matt Larkin to say - actually, you've not done that, you've not done anything, you've chosen not to take an action here. And I think Kim Schrier was expertly deploying her messaging on the other end of that by - whether it was her TV ads or her radio spots and her visibility were always spot-on - bringing in the Republican mayors of Wenatchee, the mayors of Issaquah highlighting the fact that she was on the ground being active, not playing into the Republicans' assumption that voters would just be defense-oriented. [00:20:22] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and she's been active throughout her term on the ground and building those relationships and really delivering for the people in all of the areas of her district, which I think a lot of people questioned initially - Hey, is she gonna represent all of us? Is she gonna get out to the various counties? Is she comfortable in this really diverse district that is both urban, suburban, and rural - and that stretches nearly from the coast to the mountains. It is really an interesting district and a microcosm of the state, and she seems to have navigated that very well. So I think we will proceed to a number of the legislative district races. And we'll start with a few - I think overall, it's fair to say that Democrats finished very strongly. Certainly at the beginning of this cycle, there was a lot of excitement from Republicans here in the state, legislatively, and concern from Democrats saying - Hey, this could be a tough year. We have a lot of seats that we may need to be defending. We've got redistricting. We're not knowing how that's gonna turn out. And so is this going to be a year where Democrats potentially lose a number of seats? It's a midterm that a lot of times is challenging for the party in power - just that's the way it's traditionally gone. And these results turned out pretty favorably for Democrats across the board. Thinking about things overall before we get into specific districts, are there thoughts that you have, Doug, on just how things look for Democrats across the board legislatively? [00:22:07] Doug Trumm: I think we can pretty safely say that Democrats are still gonna have control of the State Legislature. There might be a swing of a seat or two in either direction - and that can include Democrats getting more seats, which if you believe all of the coverage - but leading into this election, it was just a lot of reprinted Republican press releases about how there was a wave coming and you better tremble. They might lose a seat or two but given where they're at right now, which is if you haven't been following along - that's 57-41 advantage in the House, it's a large advantage in the House. And then the Senate, there is a 28-21 advantage for Democrats. So they got a little cushion, so if they lose a seat or two - becomes a little bit more of a headache from time to time, as far as whipping the votes. But they're ultimately still setting the agenda, controlling the committees. So at the end of the day, the hope of controlling one of those chambers and stopping all this string of legislation - and, Crystal, I know we've criticized the Democrats here and then for some of the stuff they weren't able to get done, but let's take a moment to acknowledge that there has been a pretty steady stream of major legislation coming from this last few years of having Inslee in the governor's seat and having both chambers controlled that - including a major climate bill and including a major transportation package - neither of them are perfect, but they're definitely a lot better than doing nothing. So anyway I don't know if that's partially a reflection of voters realizing - Hey, this is working out decently for us to let one party with a fairly clear vision and passion for what they're doing lead things. And then on this other side, we have a pretty honestly all-over-the-place message - and other times just really simple to the point of ad nauseam, just hating taxes every time. Well, sometimes we have to pay for stuff. So I think it's a favorable result and it'll be interesting to see some of those close races actually end up coming the Democrats' way. [00:24:26] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. Any thoughts that you have, EJ? [00:24:29] EJ Juárez: I've been thinking a lot about what it must be like to be JT Wilcox right now - the man who's running the Republican House strategy, the guy who's raising all this money in his caucus - for what purpose? And I kept believing that the strategy would become clear, that we were going to get indications of how all that money was going to be used on that side. And ultimately, they might as well just put that in a vault, and set the vault off to the ocean, given it a Viking funeral - because it did not produce. And there is nothing more damning in politics than being able to spend that much money with no results. And so I think the big takeaway for me looking at these legislative races, and I largely agree with Doug, is that Democrats who had controlled both chambers and the governor's office for so long and had really legitimate critique around not delivering on the biggest issues for Washington for many years from all sides - passed some big stuff and started to do big things and voters rewarded them by bucking what was supposed to be a very bad year for them. And so I hope that at least many of those Democrats, especially the incumbents maybe who aren't on the ballot this year, are watching that going - okay, here's the data point, let's keep going, let's do more, and see if this holds if voters will continue to reward us for delivering on the things that we know are important to them. [00:26:09] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, I would completely agree with that. And to your point, to both of your points - they have taken some substantive moves, particularly at a time - we're seeing some significant action taken congressionally recently, that they're just making some progress with some major legislation. But even on issues that, federally, congress has been stuck on, our State Legislature has been able to act and move - things like a $35 cap on insulin for families was something that was passed by Democrats this past session. As you just talked about, Doug, record investments in transportation and transit and mobility and helping people be able to safely get through their communities and handle their daily tasks, even if they don't drive. And even areas where - Hey, there's highway expansion - that may be a little bit controversial. They moved on an issue that had been stuck for over a decade and getting through and getting past the I-5 bridge connection between Washington and Oregon. And so it is something where they have done some big things. They do appear to have been rewarded - particularly those that have stood strong. And there was, I think, a question in some of these swing districts that have gone between Democrats and Republicans, that have been repeatedly extremely close, whether Republicans were gonna be able to land some arguments that stuck, whether some of those criticisms from a couple years ago, or four years ago were still valid today. And it seems they fell flat, flatter than they have for a long time. So I think just starting with a few legislative districts - starting with a big focus in the Senate, which I know Republicans were looking at as one of their potential biggest pickups. In the Senate, where the margin is closer than it is in the House, in the 26th Legislative District down on the Kitsap Peninsula with Senator Emily Randall facing a very strong challenge initially from Republican Jesse Young, who is a state representative running for that Senate seat. And Emily has finished - I think stronger than most people anticipated. I think this is one of those races where Republicans - to your point, EJ - invested a ton of money. Jesse Young was one of the biggest fundraisers - outraised, outspent Emily Randall - but Emily finished with over 50% of the vote. She's at 51.5% right now to Jesse Young's 44.3% - certainly not the result that Republicans were looking for and I think frankly, a better result than Democrats were expecting. What happened in this race and why do you think Emily finished so strongly, Doug? [00:29:20] Doug Trumm: I think basically that that part of the state, which is just across the Tacoma Narrows Bridge from Tacoma - it's behaving a lot more like part of the Seattle metropolitan area. And that means it's, I think just generally, it's shifting to the left. And there's a lot of specific things - there was the big thing they were gonna try to hit Emily on - was they wanted to lower the toll on the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. And that ended up being a huge football this session, but ultimately Democrats got to a place where they were okay with slightly moderating that toll, but maybe there was some thought that that left them vulnerable. But it appears that if that was gonna be their dark horse issue or whatever, voters went - well, that seemed like the responsible thing to do. You still do have to pay for that bridge and you have to pay for roads in general. You can't just suddenly go - everything's free. As much as we would love that, that means it's coming out of sales tax and other even more regressive sources that are farther from the use case. I guess I just bring that up since I do focus on transportation issues a lot, but I do think that getting around the district is a big one - and they did get a upgrade to the Gorst interchange as well in the transportation bill. And as urbanists, we maybe don't love that widening, but in that district - solving that bottleneck for them might have been something they look at Randall - she's getting stuff done. And certainly we already talked about abortion, but I think in that district it's likely to be a very big issue that's motivating turnout. And with Jesse Young being a pretty extreme right Republican - that's just not a good matchup as they maybe thought it was on paper, just because he has name ID from being a representative and raising a lot of money. At the end of the day, it's just not the right messenger or the right message. So it's not a gimme, by any means - she has 51.5%, I think you said - but that's certainly a good, strong position to be into and barring some sort of real stumble, I think she'll get re-elected and rightfully so. [00:31:44] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and helping a potential seatmate in the Representative open seat currently there - Adison Richards, the Democrat, also finishing with just over 50% against Spencer Hutchins, the Republican candidate. And I think, particularly with Spencer - they tried to paint him as pragmatic, just worried about what people would call kitchen table issues traditionally. I think people talk about a lot at the kitchen table, including issues of values and rights - but really tried to focus on an economic message. They certainly tried to hit Emily Randall when it came to taxes, they were also talking about gas prices. And I think there was a recognition that - one, as they talked about with Biden sometimes, this is a bigger problem than just Washington State or even the United States when it comes to gas prices. There are some other major geopolitical forces at play there that influence that. And I think as you mentioned, Doug, it's not that most people are actually anti-tax - they just want to get their money's worth, I think is the bottom line. And I think with a number of the things that Emily Randall, that Democrats have really talked about being important to invest in, people are feeling that money is being spent in the ways that they feel is valuable and useful and they can see a case to be made for that. What do you see in this district, or what do you think this says about just competitive districts overall, EJ? [00:33:31] EJ Juárez: I'll start by - I think every time we talk about Jesse Young, we also have to talk about the fact that he was barred from talking to his own legislative assistants by the Legislature. This is a man who faced credible and serious allegations of being hostile and intimidating to staff. This is also a man who mixed his professional staff with his campaign staff and was campaigning with state resources on state time, so every opportunity - [00:34:00] Crystal Fincher: Which is illegal, which you cannot do. [00:34:05] EJ Juárez: - had to get that in there 'cause good governance, good - excuse me - good government is important. The second thing is the 26th gives me big 30th LD circa five, six years ago vibes. This is a pattern where we gradually saw Federal Way - that region - transfer to a much more solidly Democrat district, or at least more reliably Democrat district than we have. I think we're watching in real-time, the 26th make a similar transition - probably not apples-to-apples, but it's close enough where we're seeing this trend line of more Democrats consistently showing up. And our candidates, regardless of fundraising ability, doing better and better. That is not to take anything away from Emily because that woman is a rock star, right? She is working really hard. She is in the field and she's actually addressing the least sexy issues of many districts, right? It is the retail politics of where are your sidewalks, let's talk about the farmer's market, let's talk about land use in your neighborhood and the park down the street. And unlike many other legislators, this is something that's popping up again and again on her socials and in her campaign ads and how she is moving through the world. So I think this is a case of an incredibly hard-working Democrat incumbent, who is earning potentially this reputation of somebody who can hold super hard districts and I think raise a bunch of money at the same time. While she may have been outraised, she's pulling in sizable donations and has been a consistent, I think, player in her caucus. [00:35:46] Doug Trumm: Yeah, that's dead on. And I just want to add in quick to that - in addition to her just being clearly a rising star in the party, this district has a fast ferry to Seattle and it's close to Tacoma - this is a place where people are going to escape really high housing prices in Seattle. That is where the working class is moving and that's where your barista lives, maybe. So it's certainly someplace where it's easy to see that trend continuing because Bremerton is building a good amount of housing - they're embracing that to some extent and that's gonna change who's in the district - it's gonna be a younger district for that reason. [00:36:34] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and to your point - Bremerton has, Gig Harbor has made important strides on zoning housing action, building enough housing to house the people who are moving there, who are living there, and really taking steps to address the housing affordability crisis that we've been seeing - and making progress in those conversations and taking action in ways that I think is surprising sometimes to people in Seattle, and that Seattle is lagging behind areas in Pierce County and in Spokane, when it comes to taking definitive steps to build more housing supply, address the housing crisis, and move there. It's really interesting. I completely agree that this does remind me of the 30th Legislative District around the Federal Way, Auburn area of a few years back, of the early to mid-20 teens that we saw there and that it is progressively coming more blue. And I do think that is because we're seeing a lot more people, displaced really, from Seattle and more expensive areas to those areas, discovering how they are - those areas or are organically growing also. And so we're seeing a number of the Pierce County suburbs shift to be a little bit more blue as well as suburbs in King County. And so it's a really interesting phenomenon that we're seeing - which we might as well move to the 30th Legislative District results. This was another really interesting district, especially with redistricting - a lot of people wondering is this going to be a district that's a challenge? There's been a lot of talk about public safety, there's been a lot of talk about economic issues. And this is another area where Republicans invested a lot of money and tried to attack the Democrats in this district for taking action that was popularly supported by voters in the district before, seems to have been a vindicating vote in that area where Claire Wilson is at 54% ahead of Linda Kochmar, who was a known Republican name in the area. Jamila Taylor finishing above 54% against Casey Jones, who's actually a policeman, an officer in the area. And then with an open seat - the one vacated by Representative, or that's being vacated by Representative Jesse Johnson - Kristine Reeves, who is a former State Representative who left to run for Congress and now is running again for this seat, finished with just shy of 43%. And that was a competitive Democratic primary - so between Kristine Reeves 43% just about, Carey Anderson, the other Democrat in the race, at just about 14% - a really strong Democratic showing in that seat against the Republican who made it through to the general election with 37% of the vote. 55+% is what people would love to see. This used to be a district with Republicans there - very purple, not reddish purple - that has just continued to move solidly blue. I think to that point you have legislators here with Jamila Johnson [Taylor], who's the head of the Black Legislative Caucus, and Senator Wilson who are great retail politicians, great in the community, doing the work on the ground to get this through. What does this result say to you, starting with EJ? [00:40:23] EJ Juárez: At the risk of being a little too snarky, I think what this says is Federal Way and Auburn love a good repeat candidate. We've got Linda Kochmar, who has run how many times now? We've got Kristine Reeves coming back to serve in the House. And by no means is it a single value on any of these also-rans and multiple-time candidates. It is that - one, the bench there is producing the same types of candidates, but the difference is the Democrats are doing better every time, right? These are not radically different candidates than that have been running in the past. What I'm interested in is - you've got Representative Johnson, who had done incredible work on criminal justice reform. Voters clearly were not buying the hype from the media on just how controversial this must have been when it's actually not - that would've been borne out in the vote share - that is a clear correlation, there would've been some level of backlash. I think the other piece here is that turnout was not good in that region. And when you look at King County overall and you look at who's voting specifically in the 30th LD, there is much work to be done. And so while it is impressive that Democrats are putting up 44, or excuse me, 54+% in each of these races, I don't think they can rest. And I think that if they do their - while I don't think it's enough for the GOP to come back and pull one of these seats, it would be a disservice to the nearly decade of massive investments that that caucus and the party has made in that region - that is full of renters that is full of young families, and people that - to Doug's point earlier - escaping housing prices who are sandwiched between Tacoma and Seattle now. So I think it's a fascinating place with lots to watch still. [00:42:18] Crystal Fincher: Very fascinating - a ton to watch. You are absolutely correct - turnout there, in many areas in South King County really, is bad. It's poor. And everyone has to do a much better job of engaging voters where they're at. We have to meet them on the doors. We have to meet them in the community. We have to do the work to make sure that we're reaching out to everyone and listening and hearing what they need, what's concerning to them, what they're saying is needed in their neighborhoods and their communities, and responding and addressing that to make sure that government and their representation is relevant to them. I think there's work to be done there and just the continued communication. So I think this is certainly one where I agree that it probably is not going to flip, but a lot of work just needs to be done in the community. And the more the community is engaged and galvanized, the more they're going to be able to do and lead. This seems like such an opportunity in this district - where sometimes we look at for Democrats, the Seattle districts and say - okay, this is just a safety seat. These people can lead on groundbreaking policy on things that we know are the right thing to do and that just need more proof of concept, more data from implementations on the ground, and people can say - okay, they implemented it there. It wasn't scary. The sky didn't fall. We can expand this. We've seen that with $15 an hour minimum wage. We've seen that with a lot of paid leave legislation. Even renter protections in Federal Way - they were among the leaders in passing a local initiative there that then we saw replicated across the state and legislative action taken on. So it's - I just see this as such a district of opportunity, if they really can engage and connect with the community to be able to do that. Thank you for listening to part 1 of our Hacks & Wonks 2022 Post-Primary Election Recap. Part 2 will be in your feed this Friday, August 19th. You can find the audio and transcript for the full recap on our website, officialhacksandwonks.com. The Producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler. Our Assistant Producer is Shannon Cheng, and our Post-Production Assistant is Bryce Cannatelli. Our wonderful co-hosts for the recap were EJ Juárez and Doug Trumm – that's two m's at the end. You can find EJ on Twitter at @EliseoJJuarez, and you can find Doug at @dmtrumm. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii and now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on Twitter at @HacksWonks. You can follow Hacks & Wonks on itunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts. Just type “Hacks and Wonks” into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows, and our mid-week show, delivered right to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com, and in the podcast episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

On today's Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, Crystal is joined by Associate Editor of The Stranger, Rich Smith. They start this week discussing the heatwave currently affecting western Washington, and how despite the real risks to some of our most vulnerable neighbors, the city moved forward with a sweep of a homeless encampment. Rich points out that there's not actually adequate housing for all of those hurt by the sweep, and discusses how legal action might be the necessary catalyst to get the city to change its behavior when it comes to handling our homelessnes crisis. In specific races, Crystal and Rich discuss the Congressional race in Washington's 8th Congressional District, where three Republicans are vying for the chance to take Kim Schrier's seat. They next follow-up on the horrifying pattern of Black electeds, candidates, and campaign staff being harassed, threatened, and attacked, and the lack of resources and support from the HDCC to protect candidates of color. Next, they look at the 47th legislative district's Senate and House races, both of which have very competitive D-on-D races happening during the primary. Rich explains the Stranger's Editorial Control Board's struggle to pick who to endorse in the 34th's State Rep. position 1 race. Crystal and Rich talk about the disproportionate amount of money going to D-on-D races in districts that are safely Democrat, and what needs to be done to make sure campaign finance needs are less of a barrier for candidates. After that, they go over close-looking races between Democrats and Republicans across the state. Finally, they remind you to VOTE! Ballots are due August 2nd. Make your voice heard!  As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher, on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Rich Smith, at @richsssmith.  More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   WA Voting Resources Ballot and replacement ballot information: https://voter.votewa.gov/WhereToVote.aspx    Ballot Box and voting center locations: https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/research/drop-box-and-voting-center-locations.aspx    If you're an eligible voter with previous felony convictions, you CAN vote as long as you're no longer confined. For more information, see here: https://www.sos.wa.gov/elections/voters/felons-and-voting-rights.aspx    Resources   “Seattle removes homeless encampment in Sodo during heat wave” by Greg Kim from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/homeless/seattle-removes-homeless-encampment-in-sodo-during-heat-wave/    “A new push to combat harassment of Black candidates and staff” by Melissa Santos from Axios: https://www.axios.com/local/seattle/2022/07/25/black-candidates-washington-harassment   “Republicans vie for swing-district shot at defeating WA Rep. Kim Schrier” by Jim Brunner from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/republicans-vie-for-swing-district-shot-at-defeating-democrat-rep-kim-schrier/   “Northeast Seattle House race features 5 Democratic candidates and big money” by David Gutman from The Seattle Times:  https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/northeast-seattle-house-race-features-5-democratic-candidates-and-big-money/   “Seattle voters have a slew of choices in Legislative races” by Joseph O'Sullivan from Crosscut: https://crosscut.com/politics/2022/07/seattle-voters-have-slew-choices-legislative-races    Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks and Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington State through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show, as well as our recent forums, are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week. Welcome back to the program today's co-host: Associate Editor of The Stranger and - never forget - noted poet, Rich Smith. [00:00:55] Rich Smith: Hi. [00:00:55] Crystal Fincher: Hey, so it's been a hot week. We're in the middle of another heat event, climate change is unrelenting, and we're feeling the effects of it. It's been a challenge. [00:01:09] Rich Smith: Yeah, I'm against it. I don't think it should be happening. Seattle really is dying, as is the rest of the globe, is my understanding. [00:01:19] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. We just saw Europe go through this right before we did. And I'm sure we're all going to be going through it with increasing frequency, which makes one thing that happened this week, just particularly - not just unfortunate, but really infuriating to a lot of people - and plainly harmful. It's that the City of Seattle decided to move forward with sweeps of encampments for the unhoused in the middle of this heat wave. What went on here? [00:01:50] Rich Smith: Yeah, they - Bruce Harrell has made a point to deal with visible homelessness by employing a tactic that has not worked, which is sweeping people around the City, and in the middle of a heat wave, he swept a city, or a spot a little bit south of downtown. I wasn't - I'm not quite sure on the address. I think there was about 30 people there. And first thing in the morning - sun was heating up, these people had to put all their belongings on their back, and move across town, or find a cooling shelter or - in the heat. And it was just cruel and unfortunately, not unusual. And I can't even blog in this heat, let alone move all of my earthly possessions across town, just because somebody doesn't want to see me there. So that's what happened. [00:02:53] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and it is - a lot of people understand that this really makes no sense to do - it's harmful, it's against public health guidance. We're still in a pandemic - even though people want to be done with it, it's not done with us. We have more challenges in that direction coming our way, which we might touch on a little bit later. But even with this, there were a lot of community members who reached out to the mayor's office when they heard about this and heard that it was upcoming. This is on the heels of last summer - the heat dome event being the most deadly weather event that Washington has ever experienced. We know how lethal extreme heat is. And so for people who don't have any kind of shelter to be put through this at this particular time, and as a lot of activists talked about and actually Councilmember Tammy Morales called out before, since and after - there's not enough shelter space, there's not enough housing space to get all of these people in shelter. To which Bruce Harrell and his administration replied - well, there's space at cooling centers and we can get them vouchers to go there. But those aren't 24/7 - that's a very, very temporary solution. So you know that you're throwing people out, certainly at night, and tomorrow when there's extreme heat again - 90+ degree temperatures - where do they go then? And they have even less to work with in order to do that. It's just - as you said in the very beginning - it's ineffective, this doesn't get people in housing. Some people talk about homelessness being primarily a problem of addiction or of mental health resources - that's not the case for everybody, but the one thing that everyone who is - does not have a home - has in common is not having a home. Housing is the one thing that will, that we can't do without to solve homelessness. We have to start there. And so to act as if this is doing anything different, when over and over again, we see when they sweep a location, the people who were there just move to different locations in the City. We don't get people housed, we're doing nothing but making this problem worse while wasting so much money in the process of doing so. It's just infuriating and I really hope it stops. There's not really a reason to believe so, based on the track record in this area of this administration, but it's wrong and there's really no two ways about that. [00:05:25] Rich Smith: Yeah, and just to hop on that Tammy Morales point and the reporting that The Times did on the ground, there's this - the administration thinks that they're offering everybody shelter, they say that they're offering everybody shelter. And then reporters go there and ask around and people say - nobody offered me anything. A couple people said - I'm gonna take this tent down the road, I'm not gonna get to that shelter. And so I just think that the City needs to start getting sued for this stuff. I just - if a referral system is clearly adequately not functional, and we're not supposed to - under Martin v. Boise - sweep people unless we have adequate shelter to put them in. And if we haven't created a system that gets people into adequate shelter that meets their needs, then how is it legal? is my question. And I don't think that this is gonna stop until there starts to be legal consequences for the City. [00:06:29] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and like you said, there is precedent - that's a fairly recent decision, that we seem to be acting - in Seattle and in other cities - in direct defiance of, so I hope along with you that it is challenged in court. It's a big problem that continues. We're doing nothing to solve this issue that everyone recognizes is a crisis, and it's time we start doing things that actually work to make the problem better instead of wasting money on things that just perpetuate the issues that we're having. So this week, we're - Friday, July 29th - we are just days before this August 2nd primary on Tuesday, which means if you have your ballots, you better fill them out and get them in. Have any questions - feel free to reach out to us here at officialhacksandwonks.com, us on Twitter. You can go to MyVote.wa.gov if you are having issues with your ballot - I know there're places like Ferndale in the state that're experiencing extreme post office delays and some people still haven't received their ballots up there. But any issues that you're having can probably be addressed by starting out at MyVote.wa.gov, but do not pass up this opportunity to make your voice heard. There is so much at stake. As frustrated as sometimes we can be with how things are happening federally, whether it's the Supreme Court or seeming inaction in Congress - although we may have gotten some encouraging week this past week, encouraging news this past week - it is really important to act locally. Especially with things being in disarray at the federal level, the state and local level is where we protect the rights that we count on. It's where we shape what our communities look like. And the fact that they can look as different as Forks and Sequim and Seattle and Bellevue and all the rest just is a testament to how much power communities have to shape what they look like. So get engaged, be involved and - just starting out, we've seen just a slew of activity. We'll start the conversation around the Congressional districts, the Congressional races. What is happening in the 8th Congressional District where Kim Schrier is the current incumbent? [00:08:46] Rich Smith: This is - yeah - the front of the national red wave in Washington, to the extent that it crashes down here or gets held, it'll be in the 8th, which is east King County District now. It got changed around a little bit with redistricting - picking up some pieces of Snohomish County, but also some rural areas that it didn't have before. And Schrier faces a challenge from three Republicans minimum - there's a bunch of other people who aren't viable, but the major ones are Reagan Dunn, a King County Councilmember who's also a Republican and whose mom represented the district - I think in the 90s and early '00s - so a little bit of a legacy candidate there for Dunn. He has, as a brief aside, been also awarded by me just now the trophy of using his personal or his professional press release apparatus through the County Council in the most abusive way I've ever seen. This man sends out a press release about some kind of Republican red meat he's doing on the council, literally every eight hours, and it has been for the last year. If this is what he thinks doing his job on council means, then he hasn't been doing it since before this year. But anyway, Reagan Dunn is one of them. And Matt Larkin, a failed Attorney General candidate, who's going for the red meat Trump vote more openly than the other two are at least is is also running. He's got a bunch of his own money in - I wanna say north of $500,000, but maybe it's just $300,000. And and then we've got Jesse Jensen who ran last time. He's a veteran and a tech manager and he almost - he lost to Schrier in 2020 by four points. And so the Republicans are bickering amongst themselves with Jensen spending some, or a PAC on behalf of Jensen spending some money bringing up Dunn's - his struggles with alcoholism, and his divorce, and a bunch of drama related to that. And Dunn pushing back against that and calling it cheap blows. And Matt Larkin just trying to pick up any pieces that fall from that spat and capitalize on it. Schrier will, I suspect, will get through and it'll just be - which of these icky guys is gonna challenge her. [00:11:31] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's really interesting to see. And the theme of our congressional primaries and many of these races is - yeah, Republicans are fighting amongst each other in some really interesting, sometimes entertaining, but also vicious ways among each other. And so in this race it's been interesting to see, I think particularly just as people who live in King County and who have seen Reagan Dunn operate for a while - for a while he used to kind of court and relish his - the impression of him being a more moderate Republican, or Republican who can be elected in King County and touted that for a while. But now the base is different than it used to be when it comes to Republicans - they are not in the mood for a - someone who's moderate enough to be elected in King County and his votes, his rhetoric, the way he operates has completely reflected that. Including voting against women's reproductive rights, against abortion rights and access - really is, as you just talked about, trying to appeal to the Trump-loving red meat base and prove that he is conservative enough to do that. And just speaking a lot differently than he did before. But I think this is just reflective of - there are no - really, there is no such thing as a Republican moderate. Because everyone who has called themselves a moderate on issues of any kind of importance - at most - is silent. They won't oppose their party on things that they know are blatantly wrong, whether it's the lie of the 2020 election and the conspiracies surrounding that or vaccine issues - all this kind of stuff. Or you've seen them go the direction of Dunn and we recently saw, in a vote against same-sex marriage in Congress with Jaime Herrera Beutler, that they're voting against those things. And it's absolutely in opposition to a majority of Washington residents by every public poll that has been done. And so it's just interesting to see how that dynamic has played out throughout that. Again, it should be Schrier and we'll see who her opponent is gonna be, but that's gonna be a race to continue to pay attention to throughout the general election. So there's - you talk about a lot dealing with the 9th CD - there's a lot of legislative districts in the 9th CD - some of them very big battleground districts. And before we get into talking just a little bit about the legislative candidates, I did want to talk about an issue that The Stranger covered, that Axios covered this past week - and it has been the escalating incidences of harassment and violence against Black candidates, some of which are in the most competitive races in the state that we've been seeing lately. There have been lots of incidences that have been reported on that we know of throughout the state of Black candidates having their signs and property defaced - that's happened to a number of them, having their staffs harassed, followed, threatened from people in the community - and we saw that happen last week, one week before last now. And then that same week a candidate in the 30th Legislative District, which is Federal Way, Algona area, was shot twice with a BB gun. And when you're getting shot by BB gun, you don't actually know necessarily that it's a BB gun - and so you just know that you're getting shot at. Very scary situation and with those, certainly, I know that candidate Pastor Carey Anderson feels like that seems like a down payment on more violence, that seems like a type of harassment and targeting that's like - we are coming after you, we're harassing you. It's just very, very scary. And so throughout this process - and again, we saw these instances in 2020, we're now in 2022 seeing them - these campaigns have had to make considerations adjust their field plans and their canvassing plans in ways that soak up more resources, soak up more money and time, and it's just worrisome to be doing this. And realistically, this has been - continues to be a systemic problem. And so as I shared before, a number of people have - the parties should have an impact in fixing this. And specifically, I don't know if you're - I know you are - but people that are listening - the campaign apparatus when it comes to a state party - there's a state party. They do the Coordinated Campaign, which is the volunteer arm for a lot of the candidates in the state, they do a lot of supportive canvassing, phone calls, especially for - from the top of the ticket in the state on down. So Patty Murray being at the top of the ticket this year to candidates, especially in battleground areas. But the entities that are most responsible for dealing with campaigns are the House Democratic Caucus and the Washington Senate Democratic Caucus - that the House caucus and the Senate caucus are actually very frequently in contact with campaigns. They exist solely to support the political campaigns of their members. And so they provide information, guidance, infrastructure for the most competitive races against the opposing party. They're actively involved in these races and they basically act like co-consultants and adjunct staff for these. So there is a very close relationship and those are the two entities - House caucus for House candidates, Senate caucus for the Senate candidates - who are already doing that work in general. And so it has not escaped a lot of people's notice that this has been, as I was quoted saying, a glaring omission in what they've talked about. And it's not the first time the party has heard about this or confronted it. There have been conversations about this before. They've not resulted in action up until now. And so that article was particularly troubling to me. And this situation is particularly troubling to me because although everybody was asleep before then, we've seen the State Party basically say - yeah, we do have a responsibility to handle this and to try and work on a solution. We've seen the Senate caucus say - yeah, we do and we're working on a solution. And we have not seen that from House caucus leadership. And it was - we don't see this often for anything in any issue, but you had three candidates, two of them members in some of the most competitive races in the state saying - Hey, this happened. April Berg - this happened to me earlier this year and I asked the House caucus for help, I didn't get any - and now we're sitting here asking again and we're waiting. And Jamila Taylor, the head of the Legislative Black Caucus, saying essentially the same thing - we're waiting for help, we're asking, we're waiting. And then Pastor Carey Anderson, candidate in the 30th, saying we asked and we haven't - and these candidates are feeling like they're left alone and being left high and dry. And their campaigns are wondering - is it safe to be out there - and to not even have the caucus back them up like that is really something. And if Black lives do matter in this state, then we gotta do a better job of showing it, starting with these candidates. And this is - attacks on these candidates are really foundational - saying, we don't think you deserve a voice in this society, in our democracy, we're gonna try and intimidate and harass you out of it. And really, no one's really doing that much to stop it, so let's keep going. And not having support going through that is a really challenging thing. Will Casey for The Stranger also did an article on it this week. So I guess as you're looking at it, what does it look like from your vantage point? [00:20:11] Rich Smith: Yeah - well, in their defense the HCCC - or whatever, I don't know what they call it - just found out about structural racism this year, so they're hopping on it. They're also just figuring out racism as well. We might give 'em a chance to catch up. No, I was - the Rep Berg, whose canvasser was one of the people who got yelled at by a white guy who slammed his bike to the ground and did the "get off my lawn" racism up in Mill Creek, I wanna say, I can't remember where it was. But anyway, she and Rep Taylor pointed out that this - if you want to expand the number of people into your party, you want to have a big umbrella, if you want to diversify your party, which has been white for a very long time - then you're gonna want to provide some protection for people. You're gonna at least want to get a phone tree - set up some kind of protocol so that the party knows when this stuff happens and can act accordingly. The fact that we didn't have one means that we didn't prioritize it. And the fact that they didn't prioritize it means that there's not enough people in high places who are thinking about this stuff. And the fact that this has to come from the candidates who are not, who are running to be part of the party, is inexcusable because we've known that this has been happening for a long time. So yeah. It hurts recruitment for that party and it's inexcusable that they haven't done anything - they haven't done anything about it until now. [00:22:05] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and even then until now - we're waiting, we're waiting. [00:22:09] Rich Smith: Yeah. [00:22:09] Crystal Fincher: We're waiting to see - [00:22:10] Rich Smith: Did the Senate put out some recommendations, but the House hasn't? [00:22:13] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. [00:22:14] Rich Smith: Okay, I see. [00:22:16] Crystal Fincher: And as well as the State Party - they've worked in conjunction. So it'll - we're waiting to see - I hope that we see more action, but it has certainly been disconcerting, worrisome. Frankly, infuriating - [00:22:31] Rich Smith: Pramila's getting yelled at. [00:22:32] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and beyond yelled at - life threatened by dude outside of her house with a gun - telling her to go back where she came from and threatening to kill her. It's - and we saw an organizer this past week with a continued campaign of harassment from someone who already has a restraining order against them for this. It's just a worrisome time and it's gonna take everybody engaging, especially white people, to get this to stop. Relying on the victims of harassment and the victims of assault and the victims of stalking to be able to engage and solve their whole problem, when a lot of their energy is spent just trying to keep themselves safe, is not realistic and not what we can count on in order for it to change. But also, in other news - so south King County has got a lot of races. There haven't been many that have been covered. The Stranger has covered them and even engaged in a recent endorsement in one of the most competitive legislative districts in the state, which is the 47th Legislative District. And so there is one incumbent in the House seat running - Debra Entenman in that seat. And then there is a competitive Senate race and a competitive House race, both of which have open seats. And interestingly, both are D vs R races, where we're in a pretty competitive D primary, not so competitive R primaries. Well-funded Republican opponents - both of those Republican opponents are also Black, against a number of Black candidates running. So you have Shukri Olow and Chris Stearns running for one seat. You have Satwinder Kaur, who's a Kent City Councilmember currently, running against a former State Senator, Claudia Kaufman, in the other seat - running against another current Kent City Councilmember, Bill Boyce, who's a Republican. And then Carmen Goers for that other seat, who's also a Republican. So how did you - just going through that race - you made endorsements and recommendations. In that, what did you come out with? [00:24:52] Rich Smith: Yeah. In those races - yeah, first of all, the 47th is huge. It's a bellwether district. Everyone's gonna be looking at it and analyzing it on election night to figure out what it means for the general election and whether or not the Democrats are gonna be able to hold their majority in the State House and - or break even in the Senate, with Mullet as the swing - lord help us. But yeah, in the race - starting from the Senate race - that's the one that is Kaur and Kauffman vs probably Boyce - or yeah, Bill Boyce - [00:25:33] Crystal Fincher: Bill Boyce - yeah. [00:25:33] Rich Smith: Kent City Councilman. Yeah, we came down on Kauffman there, mostly because Kaur had lied to us, basically, in the course of the endorsement process. She said that - we asked about whether or not she wanted to put cops in schools and Kent, they recently - Kent School District and City Council approved recently - put cops back in the school so that they could handcuff mostly kids of color when they get out of line, and or when they say they get out of line. [00:26:13] Crystal Fincher: And a long history of that happening in the district. [00:26:15] Rich Smith: Yes, and Kaur's initial response to that was - that wasn't my, our jurisdiction, that was a decision that the school made, the school district made, yada, yada. Kauffman stepped in and said - excuse me, you voted on that. And then we were like, what? And then she's like - yeah, the City Council approved the budget that put the cops back into the schools in Kent and also, you all deliberated about it. There's a meeting - you talked about this. It was not only within your jurisdiction, but you joined a unanimous vote to put cops back in the schools. And then she's like okay - yeah, that happened. I was like - well, why did you say it didn't happen? Or why did you suggest that it was out of your jurisdiction? And so you didn't have anything to say about it? So that kind of - that didn't - that wasn't cool. We didn't like that. And we also didn't like that the vote to put the cops back in schools because, and when we questioned her on that, she said she had mixed feelings about it personally, but she voted for it because this was something the community asked for. But scratch the surface a little bit, and the community also asked for the school not to put the cops back in the schools. And so it was - she was representing people in the community, some people in the community, and dismissing - or not really dismissing - but pretending as if other people in the community didn't exist. She wanted to represent the interest of those people and not those people, so that was - otherwise they were pretty, pretty close on the issues, but her handling of that situation initially and the substance of it, I think, was what pushed us toward Kaur. We recognize that it's a moderate district, or a purple district, in a lot of ways and maybe that comes back to to haunt Kauffman, but Kaufman also just had a really forthright, blunt, straightforward way of talking. She held her ground, said what she said. And we were like - that's, there we go. There was just less triangulation, it felt like, happening. And so those were the things that pushed us there. Olow and Stearns was also really tough for us - because love Stearns' work on Treatment First Washington and his history with - him foregrounding treatment and wanting to get in - we really, would be great to have a champion in there, someone to join Rep Lauren Davis on her crusade to try to squeeze something out of that body to build a treatment infrastructure in the first place and a recovery infrastructure at the state level. I'm sure Stearns would've done that. [00:29:07] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, full disclosure - I was also part of that coalition - appreciate his work on that, definitely believed in that. [00:29:14] Rich Smith: Well, and he had been elected to Auburn City Council. And so he has a constituency he can tap - he's familiar. Olow though - we endorsed her against Upthegrove when she ran for County Council and she aligned with everything that Stearns was saying, or agreed with everything that Stearns was saying, and just has a lot of expertise in youth development and education and that's something where we need as many of those champions in the Legislature as humanly possible. And she had just had a - it looked like at the time when we were making the endorsement - just a better campaign infrastructure and so probably would've done, we thought would've done the best, will do the best against the Republican challenger. [00:30:11] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, really well-funded Republican challenger. Yeah. [00:30:15] Rich Smith: So that's what went into our thinking in those races. [00:30:18] Crystal Fincher: Yeah - no, made sense. Shukri has been doing work for the Best Starts for Kids program, which is very big in the district. Got her doctorate in education after starting out as a girl in public housing in the district. Has just - she really is someone who knows the district really well - grew up there, has certainly given back a lot, and so - know them both, appreciate them both. And just know that in both of those races, it's gonna be really tough for the Democrat vs the Republican. So whichever way that goes through, I hope listeners continue to pay attention and engage in those 'cause it's going to take help from folks who don't live there to make sure that the Democrat does get across the finish line. 'Cause, man - lots of these - Republicans are trying extra hard to put a moderate face on themselves, whether it's the 5th District talking about their bipartisan support and they're moderate and they're socially progressive and fiscally responsible - is how they're trying to present it. Whether it's in Emily Randall's district, or in the 5th district against Lisa Callan in that area. And it's just - we've got a lot at stake on this ballot. And so I really - and it's not inconceivable that Democrats could lose the majority here. With hard work, hopefully not, but it is within the realm of possibility and Republicans are looking to move backwards a lot of policy and are saying some really alarming things on the campaign trail with every - and it's not rhetoric. They're intending to move forward with repealing all of the rights that are in danger at the national level, and really being in alignment with what's happening there. And so things could go the other direction really fast. [00:32:17] Rich Smith: It's scary. It's also - is it within the 9th Congressional District as well? [00:32:21] Crystal Fincher: Yep. I think it's split between the 8th and the 9th, actually. I need to double check that post-redistricting, which is another thing - when you talk about just the 47th district, everything about everything in that race is just nonstandard. We don't know how this district, as this is the first time that we're gonna be voting within these new boundaries - so how it actually performs. You've got an interesting composition of people who - some have been on ballots plenty of times there, some haven't, some have but have been unopposed so people don't really pay attention to it. You've got two Black Republicans who are leading and the standard bearers - they're trying to portray themselves as - one of them, Bill Boyce, sent out this mailer of him and Martin Luther King. And there's nothing Republicans love more than throwing out a Martin Luther King quote that he would've thrown back in their face. But anyway, talking about that - which was, I know a lot of Black people in the Kent community looked, gave a side eye to that one really hard. But it'll be really interesting to see. And then there's a chunk of races in Seattle that are these D vs D races that are not gonna be key to the composition of the caucus and the majority, but that may help define what the agenda is in the Legislature and what's able to pass, especially when we talk about issues like progressive revenue and some very basic things that people are trying to tick off - in the healthcare realm, in the climate action realm, whole transportation package, what that kind of would look like. And so just a variety of races across the City that people will be voting on. Make sure to get that ballot in by Tuesday, either in the drop box or in the mail - you don't have to use a stamp on the envelope. But I guess as you're looking there, I see a lot of people - there's been a lot of coverage of the 46th, which full disclosure - I am working with Melissa Taylor on. In the 36th, a crowded race. There's an open seat in the 34th which hasn't quite gotten as much attention, I don't think, as the other two races. What do you see in that race? [00:34:52] Rich Smith: In the 34th? Great sadness and because it was - they're both really good. If you're - you're talking about the Leah Griffin and the Emily Alvarado - [00:35:03] Crystal Fincher: Yes. [00:35:03] Rich Smith: Yeah - what are you, what am I, how - we were all, we talked about this for 45 minutes, an hour. Okay, so our choices in this are somebody who is - we're in a housing crisis and Emily Alvarado ran Office of Housing, is - clearly knows what she's talking about. That's exactly what she wants to do when she gets to the State Legislature, and exactly how to do it, and exactly the coalition she wants to build - Latina and is - voted for Bernie Sanders - and is also impressive candidate who knows her sh*t. Speaking of, Leah Griffin - tremendous - tremendously overcame personal tragedy and didn't just keep that to herself, but used it in part as a catalyst to make real change to help everybody, contacted everybody in the Legislature and Congress - even Patty Murray - and got some responses and helped push an idea that eventually became legislation that got slipped into the Violence Against Women Act that would increase access to more sexual assault kits. So this is a person who has done tremendous work from her couch in Seattle, as she'll say. And so yeah - the choice there is between somebody who is gonna be a strong - and she's up on the news about criminal justice and is in the intersection there between how do we - what's the best way to get fewer rapes - to stop people from rape. She's a really good person who knows the answer to that question and can push for that kind of change in the 34th. And yeah, the question facing voters is - do you want somebody who's an expert on housing and is gonna do all the right things on housing and lead there and join a housing coalition in the House, which we desperately need. Or do you want somebody who is going to lead on the intersection of criminal justice and protecting survivors in the House, which we also desperately need, which is also - it's an impossible decision. I don't - we came down, the group came down at the end on Emily because of the housing crisis, but that's how I feel about that. We were all - could have gone either way. [00:37:46] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it is - it's rough. And there's a lot of rough choices actually in Seattle - these are two great candidates. It's been tougher than prior years in some, where there were more clear choices in a lot of them. In City races, there's more differentiation between, at least among all the candidates a lot of times. And there just are some really hard choices and people across the board that - even if they don't make it through, you really, really, really hope that they continue to be involved and they step up to lead in different areas and really consider continuing to seek leadership. Because both people in this race, people in a number of races - there are some really, really exciting people who are running. You can only choose one. And so we'll see what continues to go through. And we can only choose one, we're gonna run a general election - ultimately there will be one who prevails, but yeah, it, this - I could definitely see that being a hard choice. [00:38:54] Rich Smith: If anybody wants to start some GoFundMe to help move some of these candidates around, would love somebody to move up to Shoreline and challenge Salomon, Jesse Salomon, up there - be a Senator. And could - someone could have jumped into the 46th Senate race too - would've been nice. A guy, Matt Gross, did - got a housing focus, that's great. Didn't do it for us even though - just 'cause his ideas were half baked - would've been nice to have a challenge up, a serious challenger to Javier Valdez too. Valdez is a nice guy, but there's a lot of room for improvement up there. Yeah, there was a lot of races where - would've been cool to see stronger challengers, progressive challengers. And then there were a lot of other races, and then the rest of the races were - oh, look, these people are great. Four great people running for one open seat. What are we gonna do here? So yeah, that - it was tough. [00:39:57] Crystal Fincher: Yeah - and with that, obviously, there's a ton of people who live in Seattle. And so there's going to be more people competing for what wind up being fewer positions. And you see a lot more engagement and attention being paid and candidates for those open seats. And it's - we are still contending with the disparity in resources between those in kind of safe D - Democrats are going to be elected in all of these positions. And seeing a stark difference in spending and donations for other races in the state that could go either way. And it's challenging. Again, I generally don't work with candidates. I'm working with one this year and it's a high - there are three of the top fundraisers in the state. I literally think the top three on the Democratic side non-incumbents in that race - there's a lot of money there. There doesn't need to be that much money in there, but given the composition - just like with Congress, right - especially the representatives basically have to spend all of their time fundraising. And while we desperately need more campaign finance reform, it should not take that. And a system that requires that is a broken system and you're making people make a lot of tough choices. The barrier for people being able to get in these races is challenging, 'cause you have to have enough time to devote to the fundraising and to talking to voters and the other stuff. And it's really hard to do without resources. And even if you don't have the most, you still have to have a substantial amount no matter how you look at it. So I do think there is a glaring need for some really foundational statewide campaign finance reform - also at the federal level - but Democracy Vouchers, does it solve every single problem related to everything? No. But I think it does make things more accessible, forces people to talk to more residents to get the - even if it's just in search of vouchers - hey, it's putting you in contact with more people that you have to directly deal with, which I think is always a good thing for candidates. But it's a problem, it's a challenge. And so many resources are dedicated to Seattle in the political sphere when there are so many needs for lesser-known races throughout the state. How do you see that? [00:42:39] Rich Smith: I agree. I don't know if - I don't know about Democracy Vouchers as a solution, but campaign finance reform for statewide races is great. Yeah - Melissa Taylor's raised what - $200,000 or something almost in that race - like the top, some of the top - [00:42:55] Crystal Fincher: Well, and she's the number two - [00:42:56] Rich Smith: She's the number two. [00:42:58] Crystal Fincher: - behind Lelach. And then, Nancy Connolly is also - there's a lot - now, Melissa doesn't accept corporate donations or anything, but still that's a lot of work, it's a lot of time. And not everybody has the ability to do that and that should not be a requirement of running for office. [00:43:23] Rich Smith: No. Yeah, I agree. And yeah, that's - it's as much as Stephanie Gallardo has raised against - for one House seat. Yeah, than for one US House seat, but yeah - it's crazy, it's a huge high barrier to entry, and we should do something to change it. [00:43:43] Crystal Fincher: We should. So I guess if you are - lots of resources, will link all of this in the comments of the show. As we do that - for just races across the state that may not be on people's radar, the Congressional races - is there anything that you would throw out there for people to consider that's not getting much attention right now? [00:44:05] Rich Smith: Yeah. You wanna do something over the weekend? You might try knocking doors for Emily Randall up in Kitsap - in Bremerton, Gig Harbor area - she's facing off against the Legislature's biggest brat, as Will Casey called him in a piece on the 26th Legislative District there. That's another one of those important races - Randall won by 108 votes or something last time she ran. So it's gonna be a close one. It would be great to have a pro-choice Democrat rather than a Trumpian weirdo in the Senate up there. [00:44:37] Crystal Fincher: Super Trumpian - he is one of the most extreme Republicans in the state, currently a House member running for the Senate seat to challenge her. They tried to put what they felt was one of their best, most resourced people on their side against her and she needs everybody's help. That is absolutely a race for people in Seattle to adopt and do something to help emily win. [00:45:03] Rich Smith: Yeah. If you wanna - if you're closer to the South End, you might try going down to the 30th LD - helping out Jamila Taylor with her race, figuring out what to do with, or helping Claire Wilson in her race. She'll - maybe save those for the general 'cause they'll probably get through. There's some sh*t going down in the 30th as well - is that also the one where Chris Vance is taking on Phil Fortunato - [00:45:29] Crystal Fincher: That's the 31st. [00:45:30] Rich Smith: 31st - that's right. That's just outside - [00:45:32] Crystal Fincher: So like Enumclaw, just to the east. Yep. [00:45:35] Rich Smith: Yeah, just outside. Yeah - so that's gonna be funny - I don't know, it'll be interesting. Phil Fortunato is a freak and a climate arsonist and a genuine weirdo. And I don't know if we're placing him with a centrist Republican, I guess, if Chris Vance is - will be much of an improvement, but it will be interesting to see the extent to which Trump base is being activated in these races in Washington, or whether there's some kind of independent, high Republican sh*t movement going on in the suburbs that really wants to moderate the Trumpers. So that'll be one area where I'm looking looking at that and yeah, but those would be two races that I would highly - [00:46:33] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, no, that absolutely makes sense. Thank you so much for your time today. Thank you everyone for listening - this is Friday, July 29th, 2022. Thanks for listening to Hacks & Wonks - the producer is Lisl Stadler and assistant producer is Shannon Cheng with assistance from Bryce Cannatelli. Our wonderful co-host today is the Associate Editor of The Stranger, Rich Smith. You can find Rich on Twitter at @richsssmith. You can find me on Twitter at @finchfrii. Now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Our revamped website has access to all the shows - all of the transcripts to everything is all included, and the forums that we did in the 36th and 37th are also included there. While you're there, if you like - hop on and can leave us a review on something, please do. It helps us out. You can also just get everything and we'll include all the resources and articles we talked about today in the show notes. So thanks for talking with us today. Thanks for tuning in - we'll talk to you next time.

Join Julia as she engages in the Dr. Kim Schrier event at the CP Office.

8th CD Congresswoman, Dr. Kim Schrier, has been quite busy working on a slate of issues, among them a bill she cosponsored to overhaul federal firefighters' pay and benefits called Tim's Act which was just signed by the President; and she voted for both the Women's Health Protection Act and the Ensuring Access to Abortion Act. She joins us to talk about all of it. SHOW NOTES: bit.ly/ProChoiceOrganizing Abortion Stigmas and Activism: Smart Messaging, Smart Organizing Weds., July 27, 7:30pm https://bit.ly/ProChoiceOrganizing Alexa Brenner (she/her) is the Planned Parenthood Regional Field Organizer for the Olympia Peninsula & South Sound and she's coming with information on how to have conversations about abortion while reducing the stigma abortion care faces, and how to organize during the election to elect pro-choice representation at the state and federal level.

The goal is to tackle inflation, but KUOW's David Hyde says it's also about politics.

Get to know the incredible state representatives from the 5th LD, Bill Ramos and Lisa Callan! If you're coming to the 8th CD to canvass for Congresswoman Dr. Kim Schrier, you'll probably also be in the 5th LD, so this is a great introduction to these two wonderful lawmakers who are up for reelection. Show Notes: Bill Ramos's website: http://voteramos.org Kick-Off for the campaign: Wednesday June 8th, 6-7 PM at Issaquah Train Depot Combined Ramos Callan Events: Volunteer Canvassing kickoff on Sunday June 5th 1 pm at Confluence Park in Issaquah Ongoing Volunteer Canvassing events starting June 11th, every Saturday at 10 am and Sunday at 1 pm, locations will vary 4th Wednesday of every month, pot luck from 6:30-8:30. Next one is on June 22. Usually at Ramos's house, but locations may vary Lisa Callan's website: http://lisacallan.org Cell: 425-260-4878

On this Hacks & Wonks week-in-review, Crystal is joined by the former Director of Progressive Majority who has now transitioned into public service but remains involved in numerous political efforts across Washington, EJ Juarez. EJ and Crystal start off by discussing the Washington Supreme Court's decision that driving while high can get you a DUI and the role that bias plays in situations of suspicion. Then, they discuss King County Councilmember Reagan Dunn's lone vote against abortion rights that contradicts his previous position. News that Seattle parents are mobilizing against changes to school bell times sparks a conversation around whether the Seattle School Board is putting equity into practice and getting kids into school ready to learn. Crystal wraps up the show with a warning about “mutual termination agreements” that landlords are using to sign away renters' rights and the two share enthusiasm for the prospect of moving elections to even-numbered years as the King County Council considers the change. As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, EJ Juarez, at @EliseoJJuarez. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com. Resources “WA drivers can get DUIs for driving while high, state Supreme Court finds” by David Kroman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/wa-drivers-can-get-duis-for-driving-while-high-state-supreme-court-finds/  “King County's Reagan Dunn votes against abortion rights in apparent about-face” by David Guttman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/after-years-of-supporting-abortion-rights-king-countys-reagan-dunn-votes-against-them/  “Seattle Families Mobilize Against Sweeping Change to School Bell Times” by Robert Cruickshank from The Urbanist: https://www.theurbanist.org/2022/05/04/seattle-families-mobilize-against-sweeping-change-to-school-bell-times-and-bus-schedules/  “Sign here to avoid eviction but beware: You might be signing away your rights” by  Anna Boiko-Weyrauch from KUOW:      https://www.kuow.org/stories/sign-here-to-avoid-eviction-but-beware-you-might-be-signing-away-your-rights    “King County Council to consider push to move elections to even-numbered years” by David Guttman from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/king-county-looks-to-move-elections-to-even-numbered-years/   Transcript   [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those who do the work, with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows where we review the news of the week with a cohost. Welcome to the program for the first time, today's co-host: the former Director of Progressive Majority who has now transitioned into public service - but remains involved in numerous political efforts across Washington - EJ Juarez. [00:00:59] EJ Juarez: Hi Crystal - thanks for having me. [00:01:01] Crystal Fincher: Hey, thanks for being here - pretty much if people have been involved in politics over the past decade, they have crossed paths with you, know of you - you have just had your hands in a lot of different efforts and I'm really excited to have you joining us today. [00:01:18] EJ Juarez: I'm excited to be here. [00:01:20] Crystal Fincher: Well it's been a funky week - we're still reeling from a lot of the news that we have received over the past couple of weeks and all of that falling out. But this week a few things did happen, including our State Supreme Court finding unanimously that Washington drivers can get DUIs for driving while high, which has been up for discussion since we legalized marijuana and people recognizing that the metrics for intoxication with alcohol are different than they are with cannabis. And that not being - there not being a really exact or precise way to determine how intoxicated someone is when they are using cannabis and how that interacts with how they're driving. How did you read this decision? [00:02:19] EJ Juarez: My first thing was - one, it's about time that this was taken up. But two, incredible anxiety around how the application of this law has been playing out since voters approved our initiative and ultimately how law enforcement officials are going to be applying this across the state. And for folks, I think this opens up - and has opened up - an incredible amount of bias and an incredible amount of subjectivity to this process where it is really up to an individual to say, I believe you are high, right? Like I know when I'm high, it looks a lot different than when my buddy's high. And that process is a scary one when you are operating a vehicle, which you should not be doing if you are high - let's be clear, under no circumstances. But especially when we are applying a scientific metric to something that - the science just isn't there yet. [00:03:12] Crystal Fincher: Science isn't there yet. There was just a post by David Kroman that I was reading yesterday and he's like, it's always interesting looking to see how police officers describe being high and things that just seem really weird - it's subjective. Their thing was - well, this person didn't have, wasn't able to correctly estimate time. And I'm sitting there like I am stone-cold sober and I doubt my ability to accurately estimate periods of time. That is something specific that doesn't seem like it would go right. And I just personally have this - a number of fears about being pulled over - justifiably fears about being pulled over - and being mistaken for being high. Or you drive through an area and you drive through an area where people have been smoking and you smell it in your car. And I'm so paranoid that at that moment, some police officer's going to be there and, you've been smoking. And I'm, no, no - I just drove through an area. It's always been that thing, but even here - this specific case generated from someone who was pulled over by a Washington state trooper. The trooper said that the person was shaking, sweating, and had dark circles under his eyes - and that made him think he was under the influence. He also noticed he was wearing a name tag from a cannabis shop, and I'm sure that didn't influence anything at all. But the person had said that they hadn't smoked since the prior day, and were not currently under the influence of anything. And his blood was drawn, his THC levels were above the legally permissible levels there, and he appealed his conviction up to the Supreme Court who unanimously found - hey, basically, they acknowledged that the levels are arbitrary and vague. The standards for THC in the blood are arbitrary and vague, but that the correlation between THC levels and impairment is challenging to pinpoint. They found that blood measurement nevertheless provides a useful and constitutionally acceptable measurement. And also acknowledging that, especially since this came from an initiative passed by the people, the standard for finding it unconstitutional is even higher. And I'm referring right now to an article about this by David Kroman in the Seattle Times. So it's just a really interesting situation. It does seem like the science isn't there for a lot of this, but really important for people to be cautious, to know where their legal liabilities lie, and that even if they aren't - they didn't just partake - we need to understand how long THC levels remain in the blood, what that looks like, because that can determine and be the difference in your legal liability in a DUI and not having one. [00:06:18] EJ Juarez: Absolutely. And I think the lesson here is just don't do it. Don't drive when you're high, don't drive after you've consumed. But I definitely think - in that same article that you're referencing from the Seattle Times, there's this assumption around the law being able to push the public and promote some level of public interest in highway safety. And I think that is the key - is that it doesn't matter what the science ultimately is. Whatever that line is that's chosen, once there is enough body of work to determine it - this is not an activity that should be taking place, but furthermore, the law does not and should not allow this to be something currently that's measured against drivers. [00:07:01] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. And I do again want to just reiterate, it is so critical not to drive while impaired. One of the interesting things in this and that has played out in a lot of different conversations is that they also mentioned in this decision - that driving is not a right, and we do have a responsibility to be careful. We should not be driving while intoxicated in any kind of way, whether it's just having a drink, or doing any kind of substance, or even being really tired. Being really tired is very similar in terms of the impacts to your judgment, reaction times, and driving to being intoxicated. So just be really safe out there. I'm thinking about the fatality collision with the bicyclist on Seattle's Fourth Avenue just the other day. We've seen several of these throughout our region and we just need to be alert and paying attention and being aware of pedestrians and folks on bikes - everywhere we're going and through everything we're doing if we're driving. It really is the driver's responsibility - people in cars have the capacity to do tremendous harm and we need to be careful, just overall. Just wanted to throw that in. I also wanted to talk about a vote that the King County Council took this week to reinforce their support of abortion rights in this week after the leaked Roe vs Wade decision - leaked decision - that overturns, seemingly would overturn, Roe vs Wade and the telegraphing that this is about to happen. Both the City of Seattle took a vote, affirming their support of abortion as a right. The King County Council did also - however, this time, Reagan Dunn, King County Councilmember, who is currently running for Congress against Kim Schrier, voted against it and voted against abortion rights. What did you think of this? [00:09:13] EJ Juarez: It seemed very on-brand for him to just take the contrarion, standing up for something that he thinks is right, but that is wildly off base and nonsensical. When I look at his career, he puts his finger into the air, sees which way the wind is blowing for who's going to be giving him money in his campaigns, and that's the way he votes. You can see here by his own history - it wasn't until he realized there was a base to activate, and I think that's really a shame. When you look at his colleagues, he's the lone vote there. I will say there is a definite sadness for me that this person represents King County and given who needs to see their local officials supporting a woman's right to choose, supporting body autonomy, and supporting basic human rights to control what happens to your own body - that is not something that an elected official in King County should ever have to question. [00:10:11] Crystal Fincher: It really isn't and you referenced - we're looking at his prior statements. He has nearly two decades in public service. In 2005, in his first race for the position for the seat he holds now for County Council, he said, government shouldn't be involved in that process at all. Opposing government funding for abortion, but saying government shouldn't interfere with women's decisions. In 2012, as he ran in his failed attempt to be State Attorney General, he said similar, with abortion I take a libertarian perspective that it ought to be a choice of the individual and less about the government. But this past Tuesday with this vote to affirm support of abortion rights, he was the lone No vote. It's just really - looking at being so cavalier and being such an opportunist politically that you flip your vote because you think it's going to help you in your upcoming race - then well, I guess this is the place where the Republican party is now, so let me just go ahead and switch what I believe to match with that. It's just really gross and vile and it does have to do with body autonomy. This isn't just about abortion, certainly starting there, and it's critical that we maintain abortion rights. It has everything to do with women being able to dictate the course of their lives, how they can participate in work and in the economy, absolutely being vital and critical to health, being - I have a couple of friends who are pregnant right now who have had really tough pregnancies and not everybody wants to be pregnant. And thinking pregnancy is just this easy thing that people go through - it can have lifelong consequences, it can debilitate you in ways for the rest of your life, there are complications that can kill you. And that people endure - not everybody wants to endure that, and people shouldn't have to. And to just ignore that fact because you don't personally happen to have to endure that is just really sad. Again, we talked last week about just where I stand on this issue. And it is just really infuriating and is definitely the start of a slippery slope to taking away so many rights, so many elements involved in women's healthcare that are just terrifying. And especially in a week where we're dealing, where we're talking about our formula shortage - we are doing so little to protect life in our country, to protect babies and families, and putting them in jeopardy in so many ways. And to force someone to participate in this and to see this coming from someone in the King County Council, it just is a reinforcement that - one, we have to be vigilant against people who are doing this. There are a lot of people, even though we think of ourselves as a blue county and a blue state and, Hey, we're totally fine - there are people working to dismantle this. And lots of people thought Roe vs Wade was settled law and totally fine until it wasn't. Same applies to us, so we can't take our foot off of the gas, no matter how comfortable we think we are. [00:13:50] EJ Juarez: Absolutely, and in the most disingenuous way is too - the justification that Councilmember Dunn gives here is basically - well, it's another government. It's another level of government that has to do this, which I think is so common for him. And so relevant to his governing style - whether it's transit, whether it's this, whether you pick the issue and Reagan Dunn is going to throw up his hands and say, it belongs in another jurisdiction. And it's disappointing because it's like, what kind of leadership is that actually giving? And ultimately, what are you voting for? If every stance you take is about pitching the issue to another level, nothing actually gets done because to truly change and defend or promote anything, it has to be layered, right? No level of government exists on its own. And when you look at, especially the statement that's used, I think by many folks at every level of government who are trying to justify really terrible takes - the statements are typically rooted in this fantasy land of - we need to be focused on what we have to focus on. Well, when you drill that down and you ask folks what they need to be focused on, they're going to say things like jobs and mobility and all this stuff. But ultimately, having a person who can have a child make the decision of when they're going to have that child, how they're going to have that child - is an economic decision. It impacts their ability to work. It impacts their ability to plan financially for their own family. These are things that are tied to the economy, these are things that are tied to basic human rights. And it was just a shocking insight into the councilmember's brain there of - it is simple logic that ultimately doesn't pay off at the end. [00:15:42] Crystal Fincher: It really doesn't and I completely agree with everything you just said - very well said. So we will leave that there for now. We'll continue to follow it. Also want to talk about a major issue that impacts so many families in the Seattle area and families mobilizing against a sweeping change to school bell times. The Urbanist and Robert Cruickshank wrote about this this week - Seattle Public Schools is proposing to return to a three-tiered system for bell times and bus service, with some schools starting as early as 7:30 AM. That's the school start time - meaning that bus times need to be much earlier for that to get kids to school. And it's just such a disruptive change that seems to be contrary to all of the health guidelines for kids in these age groups. And families are looking at this and saying - one, this is just a really disruptive change, it's hard to sustain, I'm looking at having more challenges coordinating more than one child in schools with different start times and dealing with that. It's just really disruptive. As you see this, what do you look at? And is this the right thing to be doing? [00:17:02] EJ Juarez: First of all, no. I don't think any kid should be starting school at 7:30 AM 'cause I know I wouldn't start work at 7:30 AM if I was given any kind of choice. But I will say, I'm mostly so - I guess - irritated. I'm irritated that for years now, we are still talking about buses, with Seattle Public Schools. We are still talking about the Seattle School Board not actually listening, not actually working in the best interest for the health of those children. And it is bang-your-head-against-the-wall insanity to continue to watch the Seattle School Board not do the nuts and bolts of governance of running this district. The leadership has willfully not addressed buses in a meaningful way. We should not, in 2022, be talking about bus issues and transportation, given what happened just a few years ago with the massive shortages in their hiring issues. And we should not be talking about and debating whether or not a kid should be in their seat in classrooms at 7:30 AM ready to learn. We know kids are not ready at 7:30 in the morning to talk about anything other than why they are awake. [00:18:20] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, it's a fact. And just health-wise, there've been plenty of studies showing that kids need more sleep than what is realistic to expect when school starts that early - when they have to wake up at 6:00 AM to get ready for school, to catch the bus by - to get to school at 7:30. It just doesn't make any sense. And why Seattle Public Schools, why the district is so determined to not listen to the science and to not listen to parents. The current bell schedule came about - switching from the prior three-tier system - in 2015, with a parent task force that came up with recommendations regarding bell times that led to this current system. Showing that the three-tier system wasn't meeting student needs, it flew in the face of best practices for student health, and that this system often made buses late, and left few buses available for the day for field trips. They specifically moved away from this kind of system because it was so broken and not working for everyone. And so following the lead of medical professionals, they recommended that the district move elementary start times to 8:00 and high school start times to 8:45. Teens need to sleep in later for their health. And so that was following that guideline saying that, Hey, teens need extra time just for their development. This is not controversial, this is well-known - has been for quite some time. But Seattle Public Schools staff continues to try and change the system, and go back to the three-tier system. And parents are just going, why - we moved away from this for a reason, you keep trying to do this. The school board took up a decision and they were going to basically allow the district to make its own decisions about start times. There has been a petition with over a thousand families signing up saying, no, we don't want this. So the school board has actually moved away from trying to fast track this through and it's going to take it up at a future meeting. So this is actually a very important time for parents to be communicating with their school board members and with the district to reinforce what they want to see from this bell schedule. And if you are not wanting to move back to a system that wasn't working for people basically, it's really important that people speak up because it - there isn't much time left to impact this decision. [00:21:05] EJ Juarez: It makes me really curious as to - if only this were a proclamation, if only it were a resolution, then the school board would be really good at passing it because that's what they're good at. If it is equity related, if it is anything that they can put into a feel good statement that they can vote on without doing work, it is heralded and championed. But when it comes to actually changing policy for equity and putting equity into practice, especially around how we are getting kids related to their health into school ready to learn, it is a struggle. And the district has not proven, for the past few years now, that they are able to do more than performative equity and more than performative changes to get student achievement up. This in particular is troubling, and I think you said it really well is that - this three-tier model is not actually something that is based on what is best for students. It is based on an external pressure of shortage of bus drivers and this staff. So what has the district done? It has chosen to change how it operates to meet this crisis versus trying to actually solve that crisis. It is terrible and it is another notch in the belt of Seattle Public Schools really not living up to its own standards. [00:22:23] Crystal Fincher: I completely agree. So just, again, lots of times we talk about what's happening, why it's happening - yes, they do have a bus driver shortage that they need to desperately address. Think this goes into conversations about, Hey, we're seeing lots of areas and sectors having challenges hiring people. I think in the private sector sometimes they are more agile and responsive to challenges like that - and hey, I guess we need to raise our prices, we need to take action now to do something to fix this. And sometimes the public sector is - sometimes because of barriers that they can't overcome, sometimes they aren't feeling the pressure to act - but saying, okay, we have a hiring problem that we need to solve here. What action do we need to take to solve it and let's get that implemented. To your point, it sounds like the district is just not engaging on how to adequately address that issue and moving in the direction that makes progress as opposed to saying, well, this is just a problem and we're just going to have to ask everyone else to accommodate it through these things that have been proven not to work. Just a big challenge there. We'll continue to follow along with that, to follow along with the proceedings, the meetings, and to engage and update you on what's happening there. Also this week, there was coverage on KUOW about Mutual Termination Agreements, which are very interesting - elements that in some cases are helpful and help people avoid eviction. But in other cases are tools that landlords are using to eliminate rights of people, sometimes in coercive ways, to get them out of their properties. Have you heard of this? What's going on here, EJ? [00:24:25] EJ Juarez: I think it is another example of landlords taking an opportunity and running with it. And especially while we are in a housing affordability crisis and ultimately a renter crisis here, we are watching these sneaky moves that are predatory by nature to take advantage of folks that otherwise are just trying to be made whole and live their lives with a good faith effort to remain where they are. And I think it's especially terrible when you look at - folks are looking at perhaps a 20-page rental agreement that's not written in layman's terms, that is definitely in legalese. And a landlord rolls up after perhaps an event in their own apartment or a renovation - they're like, look, we'll get this handled. We're going to get you moving on, just sign this away. And then that renter has simultaneously signed away 15 pages of protections in their original lease. So it is another example of landlords in this city - I think really being bad faith actors. [00:25:32] Crystal Fincher: Yeah, and compared to the formal eviction process, Mutual Termination Agreements are a quicker, easier way to get a renter out. Seattle law firms that represents property owners and eviction proceedings has a quick template that can be downloaded online and organizations who advocate for landlords are saying, this is good, and they're saying sometimes necessary. And because of the eviction moratoriums in place, things have become tougher for landlords and so they need it to perhaps get difficult people out of a unit, or a tenant who hasn't paid their rent, or who they want to get out for one reason or another. The reason why the eviction process exists is to protect the rights of everybody involved, just the fundamental rights that people have as renters, and to provide an appropriate remedy. These Mutual Termination Agreements are a shortcut and sometimes they're presented in situations where someone is behind on their rent and they're like, well, hey, I'll give you a few days extra to get out. We won't have to go through a formal eviction proceeding. Just sign this and it'll be fine. And people don't understand that that's not an agreement to extend for a couple of days - that's actually an agreement signing away all of the rights that they have. And even rights to be able to pay an owed balance in installments to catch up, to be able to have a right to their security deposit, which sometimes is signed away in agreements like this. Just lots of different reasons and what bubbled up, and I think caught the eye of the writer of this story - looks like Anna Boiko-Weyrauch, is that this has been abused in a number of ways. Following some of these proceedings in eviction courts, there was a situation of a gentleman with a - it looked like a traumatic brain injury who was not able to read because of that injury, but signed this document. People whose primary language is not English signing this document. Folks who end up - wound up with a fire - and those situations being presented - well, there's a lot of property damage, you're getting out of here, here sign this - and signing away all of their rights sometimes, including the right to even speak about your landlord. This is functioning as an NDA that - wow, you can't even leave a negative Yelp review - that would be in opposition to the terms of these contracts. And it just seems like they're a way to get around the protections that are - that tenants have and that we as a community and a society have agreed are appropriate to protect people from just being kicked out of the home that they have, after they have faithfully adhered to the terms of their agreements. It has been used in a predatory way, and I'm glad a light is being shined on this to help people understand that at least you have rights and you should understand them, and this may be a risk to them. [00:28:47] EJ Juarez: I think what this is making me think of a lot is that as a country, we have allowed a person's right to profit off of an investment - that housing itself trumps a person's ability to have shelter. And this is a really - it is a tsunami of little things that are put together to make it very difficult to justify that landlords should not be susceptible to losses, that landlords should not be subject to the same kind of common knowledge, common wisdom that - when you make an investment, you may take a loss on that. When you make an investment, you will not be guaranteed profit. And things like Mutual Termination Agreements are a brick in that wall that says that's actually not true - they are guaranteed profit, they are guaranteed to have stable income, even though they are providing a service that is a basic human right. That tension, especially here in Seattle and King County, is one that's not being rectified. And so you have situations where a person's ability to make money is pitted against a person's ability to remain in their home. And every time the person's ability to make money wins. And it's not through huge pieces of legislation, it's not through landmark things that we're all gonna hear about in the news, it's through stories like this - and credit to the reporter - and tactics around Mutual Termination Agreements that make that possible and make that enshrined as a cultural norm for our country. [00:30:21] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. So we of course will be linking this article in our show notes for you to read more about it, but certainly something to be aware of. The last thing I want to talk about today is what, to me, is an exciting event that we see at the King County Council. Not Reagan Dunn taking his horrible vote, but Councilmember Claudia Balducci introducing an effort to move elections to even-numbered years. We've talked about this on the show before - that turnout in elections in odd years, which here focuses on the most local positions usually, is really low. It's so much lower than it is for elections in even-numbered years. And it really is just disenfranchisement - we don't do a good job or anything associated with highlighting when these things happen broad and wide, how important local elections are, and we have the advantage in the even-numbered years of just very profile elections being covered and that turns out so many more people. So Councilmember Balducci has introduced a proposal to move elections on a countywide, for all county-wide positions, to even-numbered years starting in 2026. And all positions shifting to even-numbered years by 2028. What do you think about this proposal? [00:31:45] EJ Juarez: Oh, I love it. I love it. I think this is the thing that all of us who have been working in politics for - whether it's one day or whether it's 10 or 20 years, this is what we know will work to turn up, to drive turnout, to make sure that folks are keyed in to what they need to be keyed in, and actually help voters navigate the process easier. There is no reason where we should force the general public to learn all of the jurisdictions and the cadences of elections. Our job as folks who do this work and the jobs that people that serve in elected office should be about removing those barriers and consolidating it to make participation the path of least resistance. And I think things like this absolutely do it. Imagine the cost savings as well when you're not running consistent elections all throughout the year. I think the next - the natural progression of this is when you look at school bonds and special elections. Should we really be doing stuff in the middle of February? Should we really be doing another bond in April? Probably not. But if you know that we can get folks to expect about at a certain time - drive everybody towards that moment - folks are going to be ready to participate, and you're going to see more and more people participate. [00:33:01] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely well said. And really the difference - King County has an average of 47% turnout in odd years and 77% in even-numbered years. Having fewer than half the people participate vs over three quarters, seems like, Hey, this is such an obvious, logical thing to do. More people voting and participating is always better - let's make that happen. With that, we will conclude the show today. Thank you so much for listening to Hacks & Wonks on this Friday, May 13th, 2022. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler and assistant producer is Shannon Cheng, with assistance from Emma Mudd. Our insightful co-host today, as you heard - he's not that great at taking credit for things, he's usually not out in front of efforts, but you can hear why he has been so critical to so many of the great things that have happened in our state - former Director of Progressive Majority who has now transitioned into public service and still remains involved in numerous political efforts across Washington, EJ Juarez. You can find EJ on Twitter @EliseoJJuarez. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii - we'll link those both in the show notes. And now you can follow Hacks & Wonks wherever you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get full versions of our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - talk to you next time.

URSULA'S TOP STORIES // GUEST: WA State Rep. (and physician) Kim Schrier on the potential for Roe v. Wade to be overturned // WE NEED TO TALK about a survey: majority of homeowners have regrets  See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

This article was written by S.D. Wells from Natural News. I did my podcast based on this concept and expanded on what appears to be a potentially viable theory.With midterms on the horizon, several Democrat politicians suddenly have COVID in preparation for promoting MAIL-IN BALLOTSBlame it on partying and voting. Within a week, nearly a dozen House Democrats claim they tested positive for Wuhan Flu after they sat around boozing together mask-less while talking political strategies for the upcoming midterm elections. The rest claim they caught the scamdemic disease while "late night" voting for their next spending (money-laundering) bill. It's all just part of their push for midterm mail-in ballots, so their cohorts can have even the slightest chance of victory, after these last couple years of their absolute dismal performance.Sure, knock back some whiskey sours and come up with a corrupt plan to steal the mid-term elections, maybe by leading by example? See, the lesson is… if you go out and party and vote while drunk, you'll catch a death of a cold… COVID-19 that is. Didn't all of these House Democrats swear up and down they got vaccinated? They sure do have some explaining to do.Political STUNT? Nine House Democrats test positive for COVID at virtually the same time as we turn the corner towards mid-term electionsOh, they are hurting, and not from COVID. Every scamdemic protocol that the Democrats pushed has turned into epic failure, including quarantines, lockdowns, social distancing, masks and especially the beloved clot shots. The economy is in the crapper. Millions have lost their jobs due to force-vaccination mandates. Inflation is skyrocketing daily. So what do House Democrats do about it? They party in Philadelphia at a "retreat" where the party favors must have been PCR-test kits.Other "Hypocrites of the House" spent hours this same week on the floor maskless while voting for their latest money-laundering spending Bill, after preaching to Americans to never take off their masks, even indoors, and be sure to get "fully vaccinated" for COVID, including every booster "recommended" by the CDC. Then they all got on buses and headed to a big party. Surely they weren't wearing masks on the bus either.It's all just smoke and mirrors, like a David Copperfield show. An act. A staged event where a bunch of House Hypocrites "catch deadly COVID" while voting mask-less, to convince the populace they should stay home and vote from there, where it's safe, and then just head to the "drop boxes" with their crates full of votes late at night, when nobody is around to spread the Wuhan Flu (or catch them in the act).The scamdemic rages on… even Kamala "Bad Knees" Harris claims her husband caught Wuhan Flu at the retreatDemocrats want to scare the public just enough to vie for mail-in ballots for every election, but not frustrate everyone too much with other mandates that might ruin Democrat votes for midterms. Surely, after the elections, should they win, every mandate will be put back in place, strictly again, with no exceptions (while the politicians continue to party mask-less).Though fully-vaccinated lawmakers are NOT required to wear a mask, they all seem to be catching COVID anyway, according to their own stories published all over mainstream media. What does that say about the "efficacy" of the so-called "vaccines?" Sounds like if you get the COVID jabs you should be REQUIRED to wear your mask at all times, if we're using real-life situations as proof of the need for precautionary measures.Who says they have COVID from partying and/or late night voting at the House of Horrors? Nancy "Dominion" Pelosi, Representative Madeleine Dean of Pennsylvania, Gerald E. Connolly of Virginia, Peter Welch of Vermont, Zoe Lofgren of California, Kim Schrier of Washington, Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut, Jared Golden of Maine, Joe Neguse of Colorado, and Andy Kim of New Jersey. All of this, somehow, within one hour.Nobody is sure how many shots of tequila were swallowed before, during and after the rapid antigen tests the reps took in their hotel rooms. Resident Biden also attended the "retreat," but he somehow tested negative (only three percent of people who take the PCR tests, whether healthy or not, test negative). Jen "illogical" Psaki said EVERY representative at the retreat had been vaccinated. So much for herd theory, huh?This is a huge reminder, if true, that the COVID vaccines do not work at all. The DC elites think they can pull the wool over everyone's eyes, and these staged events are not helping them gain votes for the midterms. Either way, they lose big.Tune your internet to Censored.news for huge swaths of truth news about the upcoming midterms that's being censored from the rest of media as you read this.Sources for this article include:NaturalNews.comTheGatewayPundit.comReuters.comAxios.comSupport your immune system the right way with Dr. Zev Zelenko's brand new Z-DTOX nutraceuticals. Subscribe at endmedicaltyranny.substack.com

Liuba Grechen Shirley is the founder/CEO of VoteMama – a non-profit dedicated to supporting moms running for office. In this conversation, she talks running for office in 2018 as a first-time candidate, making history as the first woman to receive FEC approval to use campaign money for child care, and making an impact with VoteMama. IN THIS EPISODE…Liuba speaks to the politics that shaped here while growing up on Long Island…Her analysis of why Trump connected with voters on Long Island…Liuba talks her work on development in Ghana before entering politics…The phenomenon of “mommy-tracking” in the business world…How the switch flipped for her to become active in congressional politics in the 2018 election…Liuba's take on her 2018 opponent Congressman Peter King…Her experience running for office as a first-time candidate…How she made history as the first woman to receive approval to use campaign money to cover child care…The relationship Liuba forged with Elizabeth Warren during the congressional campaign…The high profile pol who gave Liuba pep talks before debates…A window into how Liuba put together her consultant team…Why she passed on the 2020 open-seat after a narrow 2018 loss…How she started VoteMama to support mothers running for office…VoteMama's nonpartisan work being done to ensure more candidates can use campaign funds for child care…How Liuba is thinking about the 2022 election cycle…Advice for others starting a political non-profit…AND 6-foot cardboard cutouts, Accra, adult coloring books, affable guys, Jasmine Beach-Ferrara, Jocelyn Benson, Berlin Rosen, Anna Brichacek, Madison Cawthorn, Hillary Clinton, Stephen Colbert, FoxNews, Kirsten Gillibrand, Chelsea Clark, Isaac Goldberg, green marble notebooks, Grey's Anatomy, MJ Hegar, Monica Klein, Kathy Hochul, Indivisible, Morgan Lamandre, Lindenhurst, Grace Meng, mom pep talks, Gwen Moore, the Muslim Ban, NYU, Maggie Oliver, paid family leave, orange juice, osteogenesis imperfecta, Papua New Guinea, party bosses, Planned Parenthood, Katie Porter, Emily Robinson, the Russian Revolution, Kim Schrier, small structural change…& more!

What's Trending: Seattle just can't quit masking, Kim Schrier makes a reasonable comment, and President Zelensky to give virtual address to Congress on Wednesday.  Amazon ditching Seattle offices due to crime, and Woke5 spins a story to frame Pierce County deputies for using their firearms. Jane Campion wrongly gets put in hot water over comments about Serena and Venus. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

The latest on the 2022 election, with ways to get involved, featuring Indivisible Vashon's Kevin Jones! Show Notes: Phone bank for 8th CD Congresswoman Dr. Kim Schrier: https://www.takeaction.network/xactions/17917?ref=342 More election details here: https://indivisiblevashon.org/ Get in touch with Kevin: kevin@indivisiblevashon.org

Washington representative Dr. Kim Schrier met with the Biden Administration's Port Envoy Jon Porcari

The Monologue: Biden's travel ban in hypocritical. The Interview: Mayor Dana Ralph discusses her concerns for the crime in her city. The Monologue: Kshama Sawant recall could see District 3 voters buried in ballots over next two years. The Interview: King County Councilman Reagan Dunn explains why he decided to challenge Kim Schrier for WA-08. LongForm: Mark Miloscia of the Family Policy Center of Washington criticized RNC Chairwoman Ronna McDaniel for LGBTQ outreach. The Quick Hit:  Leaders from the Washington State Hospital Association say they're keeping a close eye on the spread of the Omicron Covid strain. The Last Rantz: London is doing COVID better than Seattle. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

What's Trending: The latest overreaction from Omicron, and the media fails to cover shootings in the Northwest. Weekend smash and grabs.  Reagan Dunn is set to challenge Kim Schrier. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Tonight on the Last Word: The House Select Committee investigating the January 6th riot issues five subpoenas, including to Roger Stone and Alex Jones. Also, President Biden renominates Jerome Powell to serve a second term as chair of the Federal Reserve. Trump-endorsed Pennsylvania GOP Senate candidate Sean Parnell suspends his campaign amid abuse allegations from his estranged wife. And House Democrats celebrate passing their social spending bill that includes life-saving medications at little cost. Rep. Zoe Lofgren, Jared Bernstein, Jennifer Palmieri, Jill Wine-Banks and Rep. Kim Schrier join Lawrence O'Donnell.

4PM - Behind Enemy Lines w/ Bob Kemp of KDUS 1060 // Rachel Belle: London cabbies brains are being studied for Alzheimers // Democratic Rep. Kim Schrier failed to properly disclose a 6-figure Apple stock buy // House Speaker Nancy Pelosi's husband cashed in on Big Tech just as Congress was set to pounce See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

1PM - The Fastest 15 // Jury continues deliberations in Rittenhouse trial // WA congresswoman Kim Schrier failed to disclose 500k purchase of Apple stock // Pfizer lied about death from vaccine // Hump Day with 710 ESPN's Brock Huard // Fauci song "Sad Little Man" See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Today Crystal is joined by candidate for King County Council District 3, Sarah Perry. They discuss Sarah's vision for community involvement in the district, how Sarah would work with communities that have been fully ignored by the incumbent Kathy Lambert, and her opponents outrageous take on sexual assault (among other things), supporting small businesses, and much more.  As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's guest, Sarah Perry, at @perryelect. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources Night by Elie Wiesel: https://bookshop.org/books/night-9780374500016/9780374500016 “'Don't go to a hotel room' with a drunk man. Councilmember Kathy Lambert's full KUOW interview” by Sydney Brownstone and Isolde Raftery from KUOW:https://www.kuow.org/stories/word-for-word-this-is-what-kathy-lambert-said “Seattle Times Rescinds Kathy Lambert Endorsement Over Racist Mailer” by Doug Trumm from The Urbanist: https://www.theurbanist.org/2021/10/12/seattle-times-rescinds-kathy-lambert-endorsement-over-racist-mailer/ “About the GMA [Growth Management Act” from Future Wise: http://www.futurewise.org/growth-management-act “2018 Small Business Profile” from the U.S. Small Business Administration: https://www.sba.gov/sites/default/files/advocacy/2018-Small-Business-Profiles-US.pdf “Washington trails the nation in mental health treatment” by Drew Atkins from Crosscut: https://crosscut.com/2016/07/how-washington-is-failing-the-mentally-ill “Chicago attorney, activist picked as King County's new director of Office of Law Enforcement Oversight” by Mike Carter from The Seattle Times: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/chicago-attorney-activist-picked-as-king-countys-new-director-of-office-of-law-enforcement-oversight/ More information about Sarah Perry's campaign for King County Council: https://www.electsarahperry.org/   Transcript [00:00:00] Crystal Fincher: Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening, and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. Today, I'm very excited to have Sarah Perry joining us - candidate for King County Council. Welcome! [00:00:46] Sarah Perry: Thank you - I'm so happy to be here. Thank you for having me. [00:00:49] Crystal Fincher: Yeah - I am thrilled and excited - this is another race outside of Seattle. Sometimes we can get so Seattle-centric and focused on that, but man, there's a lot going on outside of Seattle that is hugely important to our region - impactful to the City, to the County, to our State realistically. And this is one of the most consequential races we face because this isn't just two people on the margins who agree on a lot of stuff. This isn't one of those - this may be a blowout race. This is highly competitive. You're running against an incumbent Republican - Kathy Lambert. This is in an Eastside district - so Issaquah, Redmond, Sammamish, some unincorporated King County - and wow, this is one of the premier races this cycle. What made you decide to run? [00:01:45] Sarah Perry: I am so committed to civic engagement. I have a background in nonprofit and government sectors. I was the first Eastside - I was the first executive director for Eastside Housing, which is now Springboard Alliance at the base of Avondale and Redmond. And went from there to Seattle University and then to Social Venture Partners International. When I was at Social Venture Partners International, I went to Birkenau - Auschwitz-Birkenau - on the Rick Steves tour with my husband. And I was reading Elie Wiesel's Night - it was two weeks before the Holocaust survivor passed away. I was standing in Birkenau - Auschwitz-Birkenau - where he stood. And that was '16. And I knew in every fiber of my being that she was going to win that election. I just knew it - I felt it in my bones. But if for some chance she didn't win, all I could see were trains of Muslims this time, or trains of immigrants, or trains of people with brown skin because of the rhetoric from the candidate at the time - our former president. And I felt like I had to do something when I got back - something was so moved in me in that experience. And it's still with me and I knew I had to do something. So I came back home and went to the single most unorganized experience of a 1,000 people - called the Democratic caucus. It was ridiculous. There were people booing with Hillary and with Bernie - it was ridiculous. Five people talking for one minute, one person talking for five minutes - and everybody's upset. And I'm an organizer in my sleep - and so I decided after four hours, I was going to get up and go home, or I was going to go and offer help. So I decided to do that first, and I did. He didn't know if I was friend or foe. I didn't know there was a Legislative District 5. I'd been involved in politics for campaigns - for presidential campaigns - throughout with my family, growing up with my family and my current family, but I had not been more involved. And so I didn't quite understand all of this and this man invited me to come and help with that - with selecting speakers. The next week, he asked me to come to an executive - what turned out to be an Executive Board for the 5th Legislative District Democrats. And they nominated me as PCO chair on the spot. And I said, "That's great. That's great. What do they do?" And they said, "We don't know. We've never had one." I said, "Okay. Okay." So I was committed. I'm still committed in my marrow. And so I started calling people that were alternates and delegates. I started calling - I wanted an equal balance of people that identified as men and people that identified as women, and people who were supporting Bernie and supporting Hillary at their highest value. I wanted both at their highest value. So we pulled together a group of 24 leaders in '16 and in '17, and we started recruiting volunteers. And then in 2018, we had over 150 canvassers to activate - who knocked on 50 doors once a month for that entire year. And we flipped the 5th District and elected Bill Ramos as State Rep, Lisa Callan as State Rep, and then Kim Schrier also - a big part of the 8th Congressional District is the 5th District. So that experience was electric for me - seeing people, a whole bunch of people, giving a little bit in a way that works in their life - it was just electric. And I was inspired. And after that I came home - when Bill Ramos was looking like he was going to win, I left Social Venture Partners International, came home and began my work again. I'd started work with Perry Consulting - decade before, two decades before - and I built that up again. And as I was doing this volunteer work - so it was 30 to 40 hours of volunteer work each week - while I had my day job. And as I was doing that, I just continued to be deeply connected to the House and the Senate and the Governor and Bob Ferguson and all these different candidates. So once that happened, the House and the Senate hired me to do the same kind of thing in Puyallup and Vancouver, Washington - and that was amazing. And then pandemic - doing this in the middle of phone calls was a completely different experience, but still the bones were in place. During that whole time, people were saying, "When are you going to run? When are you going to run? When are you going to run? This is all great. Thanks for organizing. When are you going to run? And when are you going to run specifically for this position?" And I've been thinking about it because what I am at heart is a coalition builder - I love to mobilize people and engage people in shared values. And so I looked at this position very carefully and I realized there are many, many voices that are not being heard from. We have a huge community of Hindu and Muslim, secular Indian and African. We also have Latinos, the Hmong community, African-American community. Many of these voices are not at the table in discussion with our current King County representative. Many have never ever seen her - many, many. There are areas around the environment and around transit that desperately need support and need attention and need complex thinking, not simple singular solutions. And I am ready to take that on and I am thrilled with the opportunity. And the first thing I did was I called Bob Ferguson and I said, "I'm thinking about doing this. Am I nuts? What do you think?" And he said, "If you do this, I will move everything in my power to help you get elected." I said, "That is amazing. Why would you do that? I mean, thank you, but why would you do that?" And he said, "Because we've been looking for someone for years who could run in this position and represent the values of this district and where we need to go. And if anybody can do it, you can do it." So that just continued to move forward, continued to move forward - and I got a similar message from so many people and yeah, I am completely, completely electric about this opportunity for coalition building so we have civic engagement throughout KCD 3. [00:08:25] Crystal Fincher: And that's what makes me so excited about you. I had mentioned to you before - a mutual friend of ours was who first turned me on to you. And it was just like, "You know what? There is this woman in Issaquah who," - and Issqauah was not organized in any way - in the Democratic party, outside. Many people had kind of written off in terms of organization or engagement - the Eastside. Certainly that County Council district is represented by a Republican - it's purple if not red. Hey, let's go focus somewhere else. And there, there wasn't much going on there. And you basically said, "Yeah I'm just going to do this." And knocked on doors in neighborhoods, found Precinct Committee Officers who are critical to increasing turnout and to helping people get out the vote for Democratic candidates and left-leaning candidates - critical, especially in districts represented by Republicans. And just did the work. I appreciate people who just do the work. [00:09:38] Sarah Perry: I appreciate people who do the work too. [00:09:43] Crystal Fincher: So that's what got me so excited - because not only were you willing to do the work, but you were effective - you were highly successful in recruiting PCOs and reaching out to members of all different types of communities and bringing everyone together. And as you said, you were - I feel that you were critical - you were a critical component in flipping the Legislative District. And certainly the coalition that you are continuing to build is certainly propelling you in this race and wow, what a competitive race it is. And just in case people have not been paying close attention to this district race with Kathy Lambert. Kathy's a problem. Kathy is a proud Republican - praised Education Secretary Betsy DeVos, voted against storing guns safely, voted against pro-choice causes. Joe Fain, a former Senator - State Senator in the 47th district - was credibly accused of rape, ended up losing his seat - that certainly contributed to it. And she blamed the victim and went as far as saying, "Hey, when I was younger, slapping a woman on the butt was a compliment." Now to be clear - Joe Fain was accused of much more than that, but just that - like who does that today? You know - just take it as a compliment, who should know - and just blindly defending Joe Fain. It's just problem, upon problem, upon problem. And so the values that she represents are so far away from where people are at today. Looking at how the district has been voting, it's been trending far away from that and getting further away. So the primary was interesting - it was a competitive primary and who is going to be the Democrat who comes out to face Kathy Lambert. This is a top two primary, but it is a Democrat and a Republican. And so you wound up being the choice of the community and of progressives to go up against Kathy Lambert - and wow. How do you begin to address the needs and the issues of the community when you have someone so extreme, and so problematic, and out of touch with people? What's it like to run against that? And what are you focused on getting accomplished first? [00:12:34] Sarah Perry: Thanks. You know - she is who she is, she's who she's always been. And we can no longer afford to have simple solutions. And part of the challenge is that she's been here for 20 years since Bush was in office. And our district has changed so much since then - 68% of our district voted for Biden. Bob Ferguson, Mike Pellicciotti - they're at 65% - it really is very strong in that direction. But that aside, she is a strong supporter, as you say, of Betsy DeVos - I'm a strong supporter of public education. And when I look at the district and because of the work that I've done in Issaquah - so I've lived in Issaquah for 21 years, North Bend for six years, worked and played throughout the district - I love this district. I love the cities of Issaquah, Sammamish and Redmond. We have unincorporated Woodinville, we have these beautiful towns of Duvall, Carnation, Snoqualmie, Skykomish, Fall City. One third of our district is unincorporated, and when you look at the primary, that's where she had any of her strength and the 40% that she received of the vote was from that area - 60% between me and the other Democratic challenger, Joe Cohen, who turned around and endorsed me - for which I'm very grateful. You know - I feel that with the work that we're doing at the doors, with the support that we've been able to raise, the endorsements that we've been able to raise - I have a few folks that would have otherwise voted for her and supported her, but feel so strongly that she's just not able to get the work done anymore on council. They don't feel the same way about the others, but they feel this way about her. And so, essentially, we need a fighter in this position. And I think people know that - I think people are also - they get tired of the same person for so long, especially in a district that has shifted so much. So many new families have moved in and so much more diversity. And we just have a lot of work to do here. So when I'm talking to the environmental community, they just come right in - and they're excited that I am focused on Growth Management Act and keeping the growth in our urban boundaries. They're excited that we set up zoning laws to protect our farmers and our farmland - not so that somebody can come along and allow businesses to be set up, favorite friends or whatever, and not have the mitigation for the sewer, so that the sewage runs into the farmland and into the waterways. And it's those businesses, but not these businesses - so I'm a middle child and things have to be fair. And so it really - I'm really okay with what we do, but we have to do it together. We have to have this conversation together - look at how all of the communities are impacted, make sure there's an environmental impact statement, and go from there. We do need to upgrade the Growth Management Act - it's absolutely true, but we have five forests and four watersheds. We have federal, state, county, city and private forest. We have so much space - 500 of the 1,500 miles of unincorporated roads are in this district. People come out here from all over the place and because we're the second fastest growing district in the next 10 years next to Bellevue - Claudia's is also in there. We have so much to protect if we're going to meet our environmental impact goals. So people - it's resonating with the environmental community, it's resonating with the transit community who understands that we need to make it very convenient for people to get out of their single-use vehicles into electric shuttles or the bike lane or walkways. And also that we are focusing on safe communities from a collaborative standpoint, so that we have folks working together who are most impacted with the Office of Law Enforcement Oversight, with the new Sheriff - making sure that the people who feel most impacted by any bias that might be going on are in that conversation together. And we do it together. And when we lean in, things only improve. And so having more civic engagement is a very exciting thing to me. And I think when we have these conversations one after the other, it just seems to be resonating with people and they're coming on board. So she raised a $100,000, she spent a $100,000 in the primary. She's got another $140,000 from 20 years of not being seriously challenged that she's bringing into the general. And I spent so much of my money - I've got half of that right now. It doesn't look like that on the PDC, but I've got half of that to be able to meet all of the challenges for these next three weeks before the ballots arrive. So I'm just working really hard to shore up that support so that we can have the digital and cable and mailings that we need, 'cause I know that that's her focus - digital. [00:17:53] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely. [00:17:53] Sarah Perry: Yeah. [00:17:54] Crystal Fincher: Yeah. Now there's a lot that going to be on your plate, if and when you get elected. We're facing so many crises that are converging and making each other crisis worse. We're still in the middle of this pandemic, we're still dealing with COVID - and it's a huge problem. And negotiating through how this is being handled at schools, at local businesses, just in the community. There's an eviction cliff coming and getting the assistance out that has been provided for at the County has been a major problem. And getting the funds that are already earmarked to help people prevent eviction hasn't quite been happening. And so there's still a massive risk of people who are behind on their rent - most of them multiple months. We've got people struggling - the have-nots have less, the haves have even more throughout this pandemic. And so there are people who are really at the margins just struggling - who've been put out of work, who've had hours reduced - a lot of uncertainty with businesses as we continue to negotiate through COVID and more. How do you address all of that? What is the plan? [00:19:26] Sarah Perry: That is a great question. One of the first things that I'm going to do is build a KCD 3 community coalition. So what I want is I want people at the table. I want people looking at current practices and policies from each of our communities, from education and business, environmental, from our secular Indian and African communities, our Hindu, our Muslim communities, our Sikh, Latino, African-American. I want everybody at that conversation so that we can look at where King County is impacting with the tax dollars - all of its residents and where it's completely missing it. I'm also very appreciative of the work that Senator Manka Dhingra and Claudia Balducci have done. They've met with business owners from the communities of color every month all year - throughout the pandemic - all year last year, and into this year. And the current incumbent in this district has not attended one. I just don't understand that. And so I'm very excited to work with communities of color and businesses. I believe that when our small businesses thrive, our communities thrive. I know they provide half the jobs in this country - they're the second most trusted institution in this country and in every community they need to thrive. And that's why we're doing a small business Saturday video - I'm going to continue to do a highlighting of businesses and work to see what we can do to streamline fees and regulations across all seven cities that can be cumbersome and inhibit the success of our small businesses at a critical time - that part's important. I'm very interested in women - in strengthening women and women's self-sufficiency. I want to see transit options that are working with childcare, that support people in childcare, and needs for elder care. I want to see the support coming in more and more for our labor industry, for women, and for communities of color - in internship programs to strengthen these spaces, to promote a middle-class income. I want to see our housing really focus in on what we can do. I know that we - the seven cities had to figure out how much housing and the jobs and transit through 2044 - that was a few months back. And Redmond requested the majority - the lion's share of housing in this district through 2044, and that is because of light rail. So there's going to be huge development in Redmond for affordable housing, workforce housing, many different kinds of housing centered around light rail and mass transit opportunities. In Issaquah, there's 8,000 apartments and townhouses coming in. In the foreseeable future, there's just a lot of development of this kind of housing. And I want to make sure that it's not just affordable, but that it's attainable. I want to see people be able to live, work and play in the same community if that is their choice. That impacts our social texture, it impacts our environment, it impacts all of the areas that are of most critical concern. And because this is one of the two fastest growing region, districts in all of nine districts in King County, we have to get a hold of this. We have to pay attention to how we're going to do this together in a smart way. So I want to be in that conversation, but I'm not going to wear the white cape and step up and say, "Thanks for waiting. Here's the solution." I'm going to bring in people who are closest to the issue at hand and experts in the area - in these different spaces and have that dialogue together so that it is informed by the communities. That is what is critically missing in this district - is that things are not informed by the communities. There's a solution that's too simple, that's brought up and moved forward, and nobody will vote for it on council, and it goes nowhere, and it's talked about over and over and over for years and nothing happens. So we need to shake that up and do it differently and act as if every single resident, the voice of every single resident, matters. And I mean whether they agree with each other or not - I want a good balance of people who are grounded in their values. Like my husband and I, we don't always get along and I can be strong, he can be strong - but we put the marriage in the middle of that conversation. It is the health of the marriage that we look at when we are moving forward. And I want the health of our community as the thing that we look at when we are moving forward. But I want people who feel strongly and have divergent viewpoints and they're grounded in their values - I want those folks at the table - not for the fight, but for the movement forward. . [00:24:20] Crystal Fincher: Well, and that's an interesting point that you bring up. And one that - in talking with a lot of candidates - there's wanting to get community and put - absolutely necessary and needing to make sure that you are including people who are impacted in solutions. If you don't, they're not going to work - they're certainly not going to serve everybody. But at the end of the day, you have to make a decision one way or the other. How do you parse hearing different viewpoints, talking to different communities, having sometimes competing interests, sometimes just different interests that aren't necessarily competing - just different? How do you parse that at the end of the day? And I guess - what is your North Star, when you're saying first and foremost, I have to make sure that I deliver this for the community - how do you parse that? [00:25:15] Sarah Perry: Greatest good is always my North Star - what is the greatest good? What is the least suffering? Who is suffering the most? So when everybody does better, everybody does better, right? So I want to make sure that we are looking at our communities that are struggling the most, that are in the most vulnerable situation. And look at that as the guidepost for how we get to better - because better is determined by your weakest space. And weakest not being the people - people are often very strong, but they are not listened to or deliberately ignored. And we need to make sure that we are hearing what is best for each of the communities and engaging. And at the end of the day, I'm going to look at the greatest good - what's happening for our children, what's happening for our seniors, what's happening for our women. These are things that sit with me - women really rock the communities. They hold the communities and they need to be supported in raising their families and in supporting elder parents. And what does that mean? That means when they need to be supported - it means recognizing that childcare and eldercare is not women's work. It's the work of our future collectively. So it's really a telltale that so many of our women have had to leave the workforce because they're paid less in the partnerships, they're paid less for the same job. They leave the workforce to take care of the children or to take care of their elder parents. And the challenge there is that they're then sacrificing their advancement, their financial prosperity in the future, their children's education and advancement in the future. There are so many dominoes to that - that fall. And so, you know, I'm really focused on how we take care of our children and our elderly and our most vulnerable first - as a society, as a people. [00:27:21] Crystal Fincher: Well and we're in a situation where we're seeing the most vulnerable suffering in ways that are heartbreaking and frankly unnecessary - they're results of policy decisions - whether it's looking at our sizable unhoused population, people dealing with mental illness and mental health issues, which has certainly been aggravated by everything that people have had to deal with throughout this pandemic. And people just wanting to feel safe in their neighborhoods and not necessarily feeling that way - that those who currently are in charge of policing don't always serve the goal of public safety for everyone. How do you address that? [00:28:08] Sarah Perry: Yeah. Homelessness - not having housing - is a complicated issue. And you might have folks who are struggling with behavioral health - we, in my family, have had the opportunity, the unfortunate opportunity, to see the acute failure of our state in this area - in our family. And seeing that firsthand - watching what's possible, watching how it works with a family that can have choices - as we had the privilege of choice to go to other states. Others don't have that option. This affects all of us and people could be - they could not have housing because they had behavioral health issues that Washington State really does not have the training and the resources and the personnel and the psychiatric hospital beds to address. We are below Tennessee. We are below Mississippi. This is a great state. Why is that? Why is that, right? And Manka Dhingra has done amazing work. She's moved us up - we were 48th. We're now like 35th - something like that - because of her work. She's such a Trojan, such a champion in this area. It could be because somebody has a behavioral health issue and is not getting the medication, the counseling, the psychiatry, and the support they need to get through that blip in their life - and it becomes a catastrophe rather than a blip, and where they can then go on to live a meaningful stable life. Or it could be substance use disorders - so addiction is serious and real and heavy. It's opioid, it's alcohol, it's other drugs - sometimes that's used to self-medicate with behavioral health needs. Sometimes it's just the pure addiction unto itself - it needs its own set of complicated, not simple solutions - complicated, not simple solutions for mental health, for behavioral health needs as well. And then you also might just be - you've got your kids, you're living in a car because why - well, you're working - but you have to pay childcare, which costs the same as another mortgage or rent. So you can scrape that together to keep your kids stable and you're working and you're living in your car - first, last and deposit without behavioral health issues, without substance use issues - just plain too expensive without enough support. These are complicated issues, but we are a smart people. We are a smart, smart people, and we can figure this out. But the only way we can figure it out is if we own it as our issue. Yeah, 1% or 2% are given a bus fare from Florida or somewhere else - one-way to Seattle - that is true, but it's a phenomenal thing. Phenomenology thing - it's 1% or 2% - the rest start in the zip code that they end up in. These are our people - they're my weird Uncle Al, or they're our kids, or they're our siblings, or they're parents. All of these are our people, and until we embrace that as a solution that cannot be swept away - people don't - human beings don't go away. It's not going to go away until we lean into it and engage and embrace and look at these solutions together and own it together. It's complicated, but it's only through that complicated, sophisticated work together that we can come to a solution and we can do it. And I am excited to be in a district here that can support folks being safe, finding housing, feeling safe walking around in their communities, walking into businesses, not having to walk on needles and excrement, feeling safe in that way. Knowing that they have law enforcement who are not the bad apples, but the good apples that have stuck around and they want to understand their own racial bias and they want to comply with the accountability and transparency. They're the leading edge in those conversations because they know it's critical and they're in it and they welcome it - like our new Director of the Law Enforcement Oversight. He knows - he knows that he has to lean into the community and if the community doesn't work with him, it won't work. He knows that. Well, that is an amazing first start. And he's Muslim. That's a lovely thing too. [00:32:18] Crystal Fincher: Well, I appreciate the thoughtfulness that you've taken in your approach and just how you've involved the entire community. If people want to learn more about your campaign, get involved - how do they do that? [00:32:34] Sarah Perry: ElectSarahPerry.org is the website, and there are opportunities for weekend canvasses or canvases during - we go every single day - I'm knocking on 50 doors a day. But people can go knock if they're comfortable - we show them, we take all safety protocols - only vaccinated folks and still wearing masks. But they can do that - we are doing phone banks, we are doing text banks. They can make a contribution to support our campaign. We'll be doing sign wavings. We got lots of opportunities with labor to do sign wavings as well and lit drops - all of those things are in place and they can check out our website, give us a call. We would love to get anybody involved at the level - lots or little time - they like to do it - to make, to be effective and to feel like they're contributing to changing democracy because this district needs that change. And we need you with us to win. [00:33:28] Crystal Fincher: Absolutely, it does. Thank you so much for taking the time to talk to us. We're going to be keeping our eye on this. It's one of the biggest opportunities this cycle to make a big change from a Republican district to a Democratic one. And in one of the biggest, most prosperous districts and the biggest county in the state - that's incredibly impactful. Thank you so much for taking the time to talk to us today. [00:33:55] Sarah Perry: Thank you for having me - really, really appreciate being here and you elevating this and letting folks know what's happening on the Eastside. [00:34:03] Crystal Fincher: I thank you all for listening to Hacks & Wonks on KVRU 105.7 FM. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler with assistance from Shannon Chang. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I and now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks and Wonks" into the search bar. Be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows and our midweek show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review wherever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to the resources referenced in the show at officalhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thanks for tuning in - we'll talk to you next time.

This week on the podcast, Admiral Besal interviews Congresswoman Kim Schrier (WA-08). Congresswoman Schrier is the first pediatrician to serve in Congress. They discuss the importance of establishing healthy habits early in childrens' lives and legislation the Congresswoman supports to address childhood hunger and malnutrition. They also talk about how federal nutrition programs such as the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) can be expanded and improved.

A text from a good friend sparked this week's guest to do what she describes as the bravest thing she's ever done:  run for Congress. Now, U.S. Representative Kim Schrier, MD (D-WA) uses her medical degree to shape healthcare policy as a Member of Congress. Join hosts Dee Martin and Yasmin Nelson as they talk about creating history with the nation's first pediatrician elected to the U.S. House of Representatives. Learn more about Rep. Schrier's unique journey to Congress and how she's using her platform to help prevent suicide, combat wildfires, recover economically from COVID, and much more! Her advice: Be brave and use your unique skills to address complex problems!

Tonight on the Last Word: The Justice Department sues Texas over the restrictive abortion ban. Also, the Biden administration details a strategy to combat the Delta surge. Plus, Republicans are still searching for nonexistent 2020 voter fraud. And 69% of Americans support resettling Afghan allies in the U.S. TX Rep. Jasmine Crockett, Joyce Vance, Stephanie Ruhle, Dr. Kavita Patel, Rep. Kim Schrier, Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney, Penn. Attorney General Josh Shapiro and Rep. Mark Pocan join Ali Velshi.

What's Trending: Gov. Andrew Cuomo announces his resignation, which is not for another two weeks, Kaiser Permanente seeks unvaccinated volunteers for booster trial, and nursing homes are still lacking fully vaccinated staff. Big Local: Applications open for $500 per month basic income test in Tacoma. NRCC Chairman Rep. Tom Emmer (R-MN) weighs in on the Kim Schrier race and defund's impact on crime. See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

Guest host: Paul Gallant  The Interview: Jesse Jensen on running for Washington's 8th district against Kim Schrier. The Interview: Henry Bridger, manager for the recall sawant campaign, provides an update as they creep closer to their goal.  LongForm: Terry Schilling, President of the American Principles Project, discusses Trump Lawsuit against big tech The Quick Hit: Why is anyone okay with censorship? The Last Rantz: Reporters continue to play victim.     See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

On today's Week in Review, Crystal is joined by Seattle Times political reporter Jim Brunner. They discuss congressional races across Washington State, how the GOP's shift to Trumpism may impact Republican incumbents, how redistricting might change the calculus of political races, and the González and Farrell campaigns touting internal polling in the Seattle mayoral race. Stay tuned at the end of the episode for an update on police accountability and participatory budgeting from Shannon Cheng, Chair of People Power Washington - Police Accountability and member of the Hacks & Wonks team (and U.S. Mixed Veteran Rogaining Champion)!  As always, a full text transcript of the show is available below and at officialhacksandwonks.com. Find the host, Crystal Fincher on Twitter at @finchfrii and find today's co-host, Jim Brunner, at @Jim_Brunner. More info is available at officialhacksandwonks.com.   Resources “Republicans target Washington state to help flip U.S. House as Matt Larkin challenges Rep. Kim Schrier” by Jim Brunner: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/republican-matt-larkin-to-challenge-rep-kim-schrier-as-gop-looks-to-flip-house-in-2022-midterms/  “An earthquake warning for politics? Not yet, but you can feel some tremors.” by Danny Westneat: https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/politics/an-earthquake-warning-for-politics-not-yet-but-you-can-feel-some-tremors/  “What's next for the two WA Republicans who voted to impeach Trump?” by Melissa Santos: https://crosscut.com/politics/2021/01/whats-next-two-wa-republicans-who-voted-impeach-trump  “Redistricting shows how far incumbents go” by Peter Callaghan: https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/politics-government/article125095439.html  “Gonzalez and Harrell Essentially Tied for Top Spots for Mayor” polling results: https://www.thenewstribune.com/news/politics-government/article125095439.html  Participatory Budgeting Advances from the Office of Civil Rights: https://council.seattle.gov/2021/06/01/participatory-budgeting-advances/  “Seattle City Council Votes Against ‘Tough Compromise' Bill to Trim SPD Budget” by Nathalie Graham: https://www.thestranger.com/slog/2021/06/02/57933742/seattle-city-council-votes-against-tough-compromise-bill-to-trim-spd-budget    Transcript: Crystal Fincher: [00:00:00] Welcome to Hacks & Wonks. I'm Crystal Fincher, and I'm a political consultant and your host. On this show, we talk with policy wonks and political hacks to gather insight into local politics and policy in Washington state through the lens of those doing the work, with behind-the-scenes perspectives on what's happening, why it's happening and what you can do about it. Full transcripts and resources referenced in the show are always available at officialhacksandwonks.com and in our episode notes. And stay tuned at the end of this episode for a quick update with Shannon Cheng, the Chair of People Power Washington, for updates on Participatory Budgeting and a bill to trim the SPD budget.  Today, we're continuing our Friday almost-live shows, where we review the news of the week with a co-host. Welcome to the program, Seattle Times political reporter, Jim Brunner. Jim Brunner: [00:00:58] Hello! Good to be here. I always enjoy talking with you about politics.  Crystal Fincher: [00:01:02] Always, and I've just followed you for years, decades - long time, long time - here in Seattle. So, you know, I wanted to start off - you've been covering the congressional candidates and we have not yet talked about congressional candidates. Certainly a lot has happened this week - including the banning of police from the Pride Fest and parade, Democracy Vouchers - new news and a rule change that's going to be moving forward, King County banning use of facial recognition technology, a study about civilians potentially being able to take over police work in Tacoma, and new vaccination news including incentives.  But also there's been news in these congressional races and challengers that have presented themselves, and these races are really shaping up. So I guess starting with the eighth congressional district with Kim Schrier, who is a Democratic incumbent - the first Democrat to hold that seat in the eighth district and now tasked with defending that seat against Republicans who are really eager and excited to take that on, and especially looking at redistricting to potentially help them. What is going on in that race and how's it shaping up, Jim? Jim Brunner: [00:02:24] Well, yeah, like you said, this was a Republican seat up until about four years ago when Dave Reichert decided to step down or retire - I think he was not super eager to remain in the party and the Trump era, frankly. And when he stepped out - Dino Rossi, who everyone in Washington politics knows - is a very well-known Republican figure, but has not had much success winning statewide or high-profile elections. He was their candidate and Kim Schrier emerged - she's a pediatrician. She emerged from a pretty crowded primary and then beat Dino Rossi. And so that was a big deal - it helped the Democrats flip that seat, and help the Democrats flip the House.  And I was a little surprised - in 2020, the Republicans didn't really make a big push to flip it back. You'd think that in that first go round, maybe there, they would take a big shot. They had a candidate I think was - had some merit. His resume had some good qualities on paper - Jesse Jensen. He was a decorated combat veteran and a tech administrator, but he just could never get his fundraising going, and there was no evidence that the GOP was really going to back him. But this time around, we're coming up on midterms next year, and there's usually a backlash against the party in the White House. And so Republicans, I think, sense an opportunity. And so I wrote about recently this guy, Matt Larkin, who ran for Attorney General as a Republican in 2020. He's set his sights on the eighth district now and announced, and it looks like the national Republicans are actually going to make a play this time. And then Jesse Jensen, who I mentioned, might also run again, but my sense now is that Larkin might be the guy that they're going to coalesce behind.  So - potential for another big money race. The race in 2018 was like a $30 million race. It was crazy, you know - you might remember the ads blanketing TV screens, so we could see a redux of that. And I'll say quickly about Matt Larkin - his campaign, much as his Attorney General campaign did - this district does not cover Seattle. It's East King County, Pierce County exurbs, and then it goes over the mountains to Chelan County, Kittitas County - but Larkin has made his early campaign entirely about scenes of violence and protests in Seattle, which, you know, I've pressed him on that and I understand why he's doing it. It is very much a play for the Fox News audience. In fact, he, I think, did his exclusive announcement on Fox News and then he had a pretty friendly interview on Fox and Friends. And so that's where he's going, you know, in the early going.  Crystal Fincher: [00:05:16] Yeah, certainly and you - we certainly have noticed and you've talked and written about, as you said, him citing the issues in Seattle, which is not included in his district, and taking those on - including homelessness and the Republican whole shtick of Seattle is Dying, and it's being overrun by lawlessness, and crime-riddled - this caricature of homeless people that's like violent and vagrancy and often not true. But we've talked before on this program about that being - it's not ringing true in Seattle, but it is being used in suburbs and suburban areas around the country as really a symbol to run off of and kind of really a totem of the culture wars, basically. And citing - what they love to cite is - Democratically-run metropolitan cities and increases in crime, which in fact that whether it's a Democratic or Republican-led city - crime is rising uniformly across the board. But it's really interesting to see if that works. The law and order message seemed to fall pretty flat in 2020. Do you see that gaining any speed or traction? Jim Brunner: [00:06:40] I don't know like you - and I've watched it, and you're right. . It hasn't - the Republicans have tried that in multiple cycles in this state - running against Seattle is a super common thing and it really just has not worked for them, generally speaking. However, I do think that there is a possibility that nationally and in certain areas in districts, including in Washington, that this kind of sentiment can be stirred up and that there are people who, you know, you see these things on TV, on local TV news, for example, or on Fox news or whatever - burning police cars, attempts to burn police precincts. And there's a reaction to it. And I think there is a danger if Democrats are perceived as being indifferent to it. I mean, I've asked Kim Schrier about this before - last year when she was running for reelection - because her opponent then, Jesse Jensen, also raised some of these same issues. And she said, Look, I don't want to be drawn into the trap of having to respond to everything that happens in Seattle, but she pointed to - I think some statement she made where - she's not endorsing attacks on police. She hasn't - I don't think isn't personally endorsing the defunding of police in Seattle. It's not in her district. But she - she's supportive and Democrats are supportive of reforms to policing. And so I think it'll be interesting to see how that goes.  I will say that my sense is that the scenes of chaos in Portland, for example, I feel like may have had an impact on the challenge to Jamie Herrera Beutler this last cycle from Carolyn Long. She'd also run two years earlier and didn't make it, so there's - it's not necessarily like she was going to win, but given the nightly chaos there in that media market, I think that you could make an argument that it did have some impact. So we'll see, but I think it's important to, like you said, fact check things, like, is it true? You know, is the violence the responsibility of this politician or that politician, or is it going up uniformly? And what is actually behind this and what is your actual solution other than to say Kim Schrier should be speaking out about this more, which is right as of this point, and again, it's an early stage - that's been kind of the extent of the argument right now. Crystal Fincher: [00:09:09] Yeah, it'll be interesting to see and as you also mentioned in the article about this - redistricting could potentially play a role in this race. How is that looking?  Jim Brunner: [00:09:20] Yeah, it's interesting. Nationally, you've seen a lot of stories about redistricting helping Republicans in a lot of states' legislatures, whoever has the majority controls it. And they'll do gerrymandering and they'll draw all kinds of weird districts. And then sometimes they get struck down in court. We've seen states where the Republicans have internally literally admitted, We're doing this because we want to break up the vote of people of color, for example, or Democratic constituencies. And they've gotten - some of those maps have been thrown out because they're violating the Constitution, essentially.  In Washington, of course, we have our Redistricting Commission. It's a bipartisan commission, I always like to say. It's not non-partisan - you got two Democrats, two Republicans, and then a fifth non-voting chair. And so here - they have to hash out a map by November, and the changes probably won't be as dramatic as last time around because we got a new congressional district then. But, unlike other states, there's not a chance - I don't think - for Republicans to just redraw the district, the eighth district, for example, to their advantage. But I think the Democrats - what usually goes on is each party tries to protect their incumbents. So when Dave Reichert still had the eighth district seat, it got redrawn to make it safer for him, but politics shifted so much that once he was gone, the Democrats were able to take it. If I'm the Democratic redistricting commissioners, I'm probably looking at shaving off some of the more conservative parts of the district, if you can, and try to shore up Kim Schrier's support. And the Republicans will probably try to not let that happen. So yeah, this race isn't until next year, so we'll know the real map that they're running for by the end of the year.  Crystal Fincher: [00:11:18] Yeah, it's really interesting with that - and politics has shifted, and also demographics in many of the areas have shifted. There's been a lot of population growth and diversification, certainly in the western area of the eighth district. And so it'll be interesting to see who's district that winds up in and what they do. And then there's also just an interesting effect of drawing districts to protect incumbents and making them more Democratic or more Republican. Does that then make those districts safe and the Republican's one redder and more extreme? And if it's a safe Democratic seat, does it get more progressive? Sometimes that happens, sometimes it doesn't - but it's also interesting to consider the consequences of districting around incumbents - and how that sometimes has some short-term benefits, but long-term drawbacks. Jim Brunner: [00:12:22] ] Yeah. I think there's people who have advocated - and I think some other states have moved this way way - to really take the parties completely out of the redistricting. And just have it be a more independent citizen-led panel. I haven't seen that move here, but you can make an argument - why should you consider the incumbents when you're redistricting? It's supposed to be about equalizing the number of votes in each district, trying to adhere to political boundaries, natural county/city boundaries, to the extent you can. And so maybe where the incumbent lives shouldn't, maybe in an ideal world, be part of the calculation. On the other hand, I've heard people say, Well, look, the people have voted for this person. There has been a democratic sort of endorsement of this incumbent, so maybe they should have some deference. And then, you know, politics, I mean, it's just - the incumbents are all going to be lobbying the commission and the parties who control the commissioners, basically, to take them into consideration. Crystal Fincher: [00:13:28] Yeah well, certainly a party with the majority wants to try and lock that in as much as possible. Other states, especially as you cited - the Republican states - definitely do all they can to make sure that they lock that in. States like ours, where both parties do have to agree - things usually don't turn out quite as lopsided as they do in those other states, but it'll be really interesting to see - including in a race like the one we have with Adam Smith, who's drawn at least three challengers to his left, in the ninth congressional district. Which is interesting and Danny Westneat wrote about earlier this week in the Seattle Times - have you looked much at that race?  Jim Brunner: [00:14:12] I haven't really dived in, and Danny wrote an interesting column about it. It sort of - he framed it right - it's not evidence that the Democrats are tearing themselves apart, necessarily. But it is evidence of this just continuing debate - tension, if you want to call it - between progressives and the more - I don't know if you want to call it mainstream or what do you want to call it - moderate wing, or just the incumbent? You know, Adam Smith has been there for a long time now in the ninth district and it's funny - in redistricting - he is the Chair of the House Armed Services Committee and his district used to include the military base down in Pierce County. And in redistricting, he no longer has that in his district, but he has this vestigial influence in that realm that he's continued to hold, but because that's where he came up. And it's been interesting - his district is more liberal than it was when it - before the last round of redistricting. And I think he has signaled to voters that he's trying to be progressive too on issues like immigration. I mean, it's very apparent that he is trying to make it known that he's with them, but these progressive challengers saying, You know, it's not enough. You're part of the old guard. It's time for new voices.  Crystal Fincher: [00:15:42] Yeah, absolutely. And one thing that I think also influences some of the further left-leaning candidates and constituency - that is the fact that Pramila Jayapal is also right there, and so visible and so vocal on many issues that are important to several areas of the district in a way that they didn't see her predecessor or Adam Smith before. And a lot of people going, Okay, well, comparing to that - Adam looks real moderate. And as you said, he's certainly been trying to signal that - and say things in some areas - that seem to be more progressive than they were before. And another is he's maintained, so it's going to be interesting to see how that race shapes up - how the incumbents gain traction, but it seems like - from some institutional forces that they aren't uniformly aligned necessarily with Adam Smith. So he certainly is going to have a bottomless war chest with his donors, and it really is going to be about - do people see him as the leader that they want moving forward, or is it time for a change as has been in so many other areas?  Jim Brunner: [00:17:02] And will he lobby the Redistricting Commission to shift around his district again - maybe get rid of some of the Seattle portions or something. The former, great Tacoma News Tribune columnist and reporter, Pete Callaghan, who's in Minnesota - he wrote a really good story after the last round of redistricting that I was kind of jealous of - where he got all the emails that went to the Redistricting Commission and wrote a story about how Adam Smith was the most active lobbyer - he wanted his district to get moved. He wanted to have, I think, Mercer Island and Bellevue, where he lives now, and that happened. So there's a varying level of people - politicians - keeping an eye on it and being active in it. So it'll be interesting to see if he moves in that direction this time, or if he feels sort of content in - with the boundaries where they are. Crystal Fincher: [00:17:59] Yeah, it'll be interesting. I live near the border of the eighth and ninth congressional district, so we'll see where I end up.  Jim Brunner: [00:18:06] You might get shifted. Yeah, absolutely.  Crystal Fincher: [00:18:09] It'll be interesting to see. Now this is really - these races are really important, particularly races in - like that one in the eighth congressional district, with Kim Schrier, because the majority is narrow in the House right now. The Democrats only lead by five - is it five seats?  Jim Brunner: [00:18:26] I think that - yeah, I think the Republicans need to flip five seats. And people are projecting that, just given their advantages in legislatures for redistricting around the country and some of the population shifts, they may already be on their way to taking the majority back in 2022 - like they're favored. Crystal Fincher: [00:18:49] They're definitely favored. It's going to be a fight and Democrats are going to have to win competitive seats - and some competitive seats that are currently held by Republicans to hold on to the House. And the Senate. So it'll be really interesting to see what Democrats do right now, just in terms of voter protections and making sure people have fair and equitable access to the vote and the ballot. And whether they take action or not now - with Kyrsten Sinema and Joe Manchin saying that they are not in favor of ending the filibuster - that's not looking likely unless that changes. So this is going to be interesting.  And then - you've been covering races on the Eastern side of the state, where some more moderate Republicans have held seats, but they're being challenged by people further to the right - challengers who publicly will not say whether Joe Biden really won the presidency, they're major Trump supporters, they're into conspiracy theories and at least not refuting them publicly. That's a very different place than we were 10 years ago. What do those races look like? Jim Brunner: [00:20:12] Yeah. So of course, Dan Newhouse, in the fourth district - a Republican incumbent - and Jaime Herrera Beutler, incumbent in the third district, voted for the Trump impeachment, the last, the latest Trump impeachment. And then they supported the January 6th commission. And so - but their impeachment vote immediately set off a lot of anger among the Republican base, who - a lot of people in the Republican base think that's a betrayal. And say it was kind of extraordinary - the only member of Congress in Washington who didn't vote for impeachment was Cathy McMorris Rodgers, out of Spokane. So it was 9 out of 10 of our House members - it's kind of extraordinary and bipartisan in that sense. And so, yeah, both Jamie Herrera Beutler and Dan Newhouse have some pretty, you know, fair to say, Trumpy challengers who are running because they made those votes. And people might remember Loren Culp, who ran for governor - he's declared against Newhouse. And he's definitely somebody who has even tried to claim - just falsely without evidence - that his own 500,000+ loss to Jay Inslee in 2020 was somehow - might not have happened, or in some cases I think he said, Well, I don't know if you know - I could have got all that back. But he's tried to raise doubts about the electoral process - even though, of course, it's Secretary of State Kim Wyman here, who's our top elected official, or elections official, who's Republican. And then in - I think State Rep Brad Klippert, very conservative, also running against Newhouse. And there's a third guy who is kind of along the same vein.  And then against Jamie Herrera Beutler you've got three, at least three, very pro-Trump challengers. I would say two of them are really fighting it out to be the one. I think it's most likely that Joe Kent, who is on a daily basis still saying, Yes, we should audit - we should examine, Congress should examine - the 2020 election as though it's still up in the air. He's an ex-special forces veteran. His wife was actually killed by a terrorist bombing. She was in the military and in intelligence too, and she was killed overseas - so it's a pretty interesting background story that he has. And he definitely has been outspoken about endless wars. And so he thinks he's aligned with Trump on that sort of isolationist, you might call it, foreign policy. And then he has just bought into some of the conspiracy theories too. But he has been - he was out in Florida, I think he did a rally with Marjorie Taylor Greene, he's met with Donald Trump. I think he might get the full-on Trump endorsement. Billionaire Peter Thiel, I think, has indicated he might back him. And so that'll be interesting if they marshal a bunch of forces against Jamie Herrera Beutler, who not only voted for impeachment, but then offered to be like a star witness. And really kind of ignited the end of the impeachment proceedings. And then really quickly, the other main competitor there, is a woman named Heidi St. John, who's a kind of a Christian self-help author, homeschooler, very anti-mask, very dismissive of the coronavirus pandemic - is calling masks "face diapers" and things like that. And she's out there organizing, and has some support too. So again, it'll be really interesting to see how that race plays out and where the Democrats fit in, because Democrats haven't been able to compete there, but, you know, I just don't know - it's a very chaotic situation that's going to play out.  Crystal Fincher: [00:24:19] Yeah. I think it's going to be a chaotic situation. I still think - out there, Republicans have the advantage. And I think there's a lot of wishing and hoping, especially from people in Seattle on the west side of the mountains, that like logic and reason will prevail. Surely it has to - this is Washington state. We've had, you know, moderate Republicans and that's just not who we are. And I think that we are far past the point of recognizing that this is where the Republican party is now. The Republican party is the party of Trump. If there is someone self identifying as a Republican, that's more than likely what they're identifying as - as a supporter of Trump, and what you've seen from him, and all of that. And that's what we're close to. And we haven't just seen these challengers rise up and have support - but also the censure from Republican local parties and the state party of people who took the impeachment vote and who wanted to do that. And we just saw the January 6 commission be not voted and supported - and those challengers saying - some of them are saying, "I don't know if I would have voted yes or no on that. Others are just like, no, it's a witch hunt." That is where we're at. And really, it's hard to see how that doesn't take over in 2022, just based on redistricting. So I hope people get involved and get engaged with these - hopefully there is real engagement and activism on the Democratic side, just to not have that conversation be so focused on that element of the conversation. But it'll be a show to watch - it will be interesting to see.  Jim Brunner: [00:26:19] Yeah. I think another thing that's interesting is, I dunno - I find it kind of funny sometimes - Democrats in places like Seattle will get excited about, Oh, you know, we're gonna, you know, take off, take out, Ted Cruz or something. Or Mitch McConnell. And they'll spend a whole bunch of money and send checks out there, which I understand - I mean, Republicans are doing the same things if they think that, you know, they could take out Nancy Pelosi or whatever. But it is kind of interesting to see how just, I don't know, everything is so nationalized. And I think sometimes people aren't paying attention to what's in their backyards necessarily. It's interesting - Dan Newhouse - you do see kind of this cross-party admiration among people who are alarmed by Trump - that they're like, Thank you, Dan Newhouse. Thank you, Jamie Herrera Beutler. But you know, Dan Newhouse is very conservative and he's not a Democrat. I mean, he has his ideals and he's - I think he's been very consistent actually, whether you agree with him or not. And he voted - he's voted like, you know, 90+ percent with the Trump agenda - which is in Congress was mainly just a pretty standard low taxes and cut back regulation agenda. So to see him potentially get ousted, just because he said this insurrection was a step too far is pretty interesting. I still think he can probably get re-elected, but we'll see.  Crystal Fincher: [00:27:51] I still think they have the advantage, but that could change. I think that we - we don't yet know what's gonna come from the Trump camp, leading up here through the summer and into next year. I think these conversations may move and the ground may continue to shift under them. I think that the pressure is also on them to move further to the right. So I think where we've seen people be consistent before, there may be a challenge with that in the future. And in the same way that Adam Smith is trying to signal that he's moving further to the left, we may see these once, you know, people who were considered moderate Republicans start to take on a different tone.  The one thing I wanted it to touch on before we head out was, speaking of local races - there were a couple of polls that some of the Seattle mayoral candidates referenced - specifically Jessyn Farrell and Lorena González. Now they did some polling - they were internal polls, they were pollsters hired by their campaigns. They did not release the full polls, which is standard in polling, and so we don't know what all the questions were, how they were all asked, or anything in that. So when that happens, automatically, you're taking the polls with a grain of salt because you don't know what they're really saying. But there were some consistencies between them and the biggest consistency was that Bruce Harrell appears to be in first place. And Lorena González appears to be in second place. Is that how you read them, Jim?  Jim Brunner: [00:29:32] I mean, from what I've seen, I think that was the common thread. I, like you, I'm pretty skeptical about internal polls, candidate polls - because they usually don't release the whole thing. And even when they do - generally I won't, I don't write articles on them - just based on internal polling, but I do love to consume them, and I'm fascinated by them - and how, not only what the results are, but how they're deployed to try to move the campaign. So from what I've seen - yeah, I think Harrell appears to be in first place in this race. And as we're getting closer to the August primary and the - people like Lorena González and a few others are competing for second. But you know, this is - this could all shift. The messaging is just starting to happen. People are trying to carve out their identities. People like Jessyn Farrell, Andrew Grant Houston - who's in - really raised his profile because of his Democracy Voucher haul.  Crystal Fincher: [00:30:37] Absolutely. And it is early on. And the third common thread between them is that - both of them, I think, had at least 40% and above of the electorate is undecided. It is early in a City race, which doesn't get all the nightly attention on the news. The campaigns really haven't started, people haven't gotten mailers yet, they aren't seeing commercials, they aren't hearing radio ads or anything like that yet. And that can certainly change the dynamics of the race. And as more forums happen and some of the contrast between the candidates are known, we will see that.  Also Casey Sixkiller was a late entrance into the race - seems to be more - closer to Bruce Harrell, who a lot of people consider to be the most moderate candidate in this field. And so is drawing support there and people are wondering, Okay, so in terms of the Times endorsement - the Chamber itself is not going to be doing endorsements or supporting candidates, but all of the entities will be supporting in the same way, just through different means. So where does that support go? And I think Casey Sixkiller is looking to see if he can put a dent into that, and we'll see how that turns out. Jim Brunner: [00:31:57] Yeah. I think it's interesting. There's some candidates fighting through the sort of - within the Seattle sort of bubble, to be on the more progressive side. And then there's people like Harrell who are still, I think, liberal Democrats basically, but are talking to businesses. And I think Harrell has a - and they're trying just to talk about the City's homeless encampments in a way that attracts support. And that's going to be a big issue in this race. And to what extent are people going to talk about encampments in a way that - where they're trying to attract support from people who were just alarmed by seeing them, and versus trying to get people housing and how we can solve the problem. And it's a mix, it's a balance - I think for everybody. It's going to be interesting to see how that goes. I think with Harrell and the - if you call it like the business support side or the moderate support side of the equation - you mentioned Sixkiller who is a well-known name in Seattle. And there was another guy who jumped in that I wrote a short story on, Art Langlie, also has a well-known name in Seattle - never really been involved in politics, but he's the son or grandson of Arthur Langlie, who was Seattle mayor long ago and the governor long ago. And I don't really see a path for him, but I could see him taking a few points out of Bruce Harrell's totals, just as I can Sixkiller.  The other dynamic, I think - I'd be curious to hear what you say, think about this - there's a whole inside-outside game here. You know, you had people like Sixkiller declare and he's been a Deputy Mayor under Jenny Durkan, but he's saying I'm a fresh outside voice or I can bring fresh, independent outside voices. And I think that's kind of gonna cause some eyebrow rolling or whatever. And then you've got like Bruce Harrell - he was at City Hall for a long time, but then he stepped away. So now, you know, to what extent can he credibly say, I am sort of an outsider, but with also some insider knowledge - in a way, that's a good position to be in. And then you've got Lorena González, who's City Council president, also has expressed ambitions to run for Attorney General. So, it's going to be interesting to see her honing her message. And all of them - like you said, it's going to be kind of a scramble. I'm curious what your take on that is too.  Crystal Fincher: [00:34:32] You know, it's going to be interesting. I think that - I think people kind of uniformly reacted with raised eyebrows to Casey Sixkiller saying, You know, I'm an outsider. It was just like, you're the Deputy Mayor right now - for homelessness actually - the number one issue in the City for a lot of people. And I think there has been a challenge in him trying to independently define who he is, then there's - I don't know if he's going to wind up ensnared in this text controversy or not. There are a lot of people in the mayor's office - I don't know if Casey Sixkiller has been pressed on that, but it seems like a relevant question. I also think that there - I don't know that it was wise for him to say, No, we absolutely have spent all that FEMA money. I think that - we certainly saw Colleen Echohawk take exception to that online and dedicate an entire Twitter thread to debunking that with a variety of independent  reporting. And in a forum, Andrew Grant Houston saying, Hey dude, you're lying about that, and I personally worked on it - because even Andrew Grant Houston works in the office of a Seattle City Councilmember. So this whole conversation about insiders and outsiders is interesting and unique - and a lot of insiders who are claiming to be outsiders, and outsiders who are insiders and -  I think it's really gonna come down to how people are talking about the issues. I think one thing that's going to be telling, and that's going to be used kind of as a proxy and dividing line is whether or not they support the Compassion Seattle initiative, which Casey Sixkiller and Jessyn Farrell have said that they do. Bruce Harrell has signaled mixed support - I'm not exactly sure. I feel like he said yes before, but he definitely said no in a forum, but then asked to explain himself and, you know, seemed like he wanted to hedge that. So I'm not sure, but that'll be, I think, what helps to separate and define where people look to see where they are on homelessness - is where are you at on the Compassion Seattle initiative. Which is viewed very differently by people. Jim Brunner: [00:36:51] And that's why people talk about defining yourself. I mean, that initiative campaign is trying to define itself - for the charter amendment, I guess.  Crystal Fincher: [00:36:59] Yes.  Jim Brunner: [00:37:01] Yeah, and we're at Seattle Times - we're trying to press the candidates, trying to get some clear answers on where they stand on issues like that, doing some voter guides and things like that. But yeah, there've been some forums out there where people are starting to get to see the candidates answer those questions. And I sort of feel like people know the field here, of the top candidates, even though there's more than - like there's 15 people that will be on the ballot. You know, we can name the 5 or 6 who are really being invited to the big forums and are part of the conversation. So it's good - it's good to have, to be able to winnow it a little bit, because realistically there's not that many who have much of a shot - that they should all have a chance to make their case, but we should focus on the ones who have demonstrated some support. Crystal Fincher: [00:37:52] Yeah, some minimum viability. I also think that now there are two people who have communicated polls that show Bruce and Lorena as the frontrunners - that that in effect put a target on their backs for other candidates in the forums who are now saying, Okay, I have to take one of them out and leapfrog them in order to be, in order to make it through the primary. So I think we're going to start to see where a lot of people were making their case. Some people feel like someone has got to do the work of drawing some direct contrasts on some other issues and that'll be a new dynamic. Jim Brunner: [00:38:28] Yeah. It kind of reminds me of the presidential, Democratic presidential debates, when you had so many, and then it got winnowed and then it became clear that at one point - well, I mean, at some point, of course, Biden was the frontrunner and had a big target on his back. People came at him and he just kinda, amiably sort of, not always excelling in the debate, but got through it. So I've had somebody - I can't remember who I was talking to - claim that they think they see sort of a Biden-esque position or quality in Bruce Harrell in a weird way, you know. I don't know. What do you think?  Crystal Fincher: [00:39:13] Uhhhh -  Jim Brunner: [00:39:13] In terms of his positioning.  Crystal Fincher: [00:39:14] You don't see the look on my face right now, but you know -  Jim Brunner: [00:39:17] In terms of his positioning in the field is all -  Crystal Fincher: [00:39:19] You know, I guess - especially, I think for - I think that could be fair to say. Especially if you think back to how that was viewed during the campaign. I think that Biden has actually governed a bit more progressively than people expected so far. Partly because bipartisanship isn't really a thing at this point, certainly not as people think about it 20 years ago. So potentially, I think that just in terms of - Biden was certainly viewed as one of the most viable moderates. And Bruce is viewed as a viable moderate. I don't know that I would go much further down that road, personally. You know -  Jim Brunner: [00:40:08] And then there's no Trump to run against at the end of the primary, which is different. Although, I believe there - I've heard some mayoral candidates continue to talk about Trump. Crystal Fincher: [00:40:19] Yeah. I don't know how much that helps or not in Seattle. I don't think that's really relevant to the City race. I think it's going to be interesting as candidates look at, especially the last election in 2019 and the backlash to some of the Amazon control and corporate control, income inequality, workers' rights and conditions - that candidates who have been more closely aligned with those corporations may take some heat coming up. I don't know if that's going to come up in these races or not, and certainly some candidates have more of a vulnerability on that than others, but who knows.  Jim Brunner: [00:40:58] Yeah. And I'm sure that that will be part of the conversation. Absolutely.  Crystal Fincher: [00:41:03] Yeah.  Jim Brunner: [00:41:04] You know, it feels like Amazon and the Chamber kind of got stung by playing their big money hand too extremely a couple of years ago. Of course, I know that they resent that to some extent, because they point out that unions and others spent a lot of money too, but it was a big splashy - a million dollar push - and it arguably backfired. So they're trying to be much more strategic -  Crystal Fincher: [00:41:33] Covert.  Jim Brunner: [00:41:33] Or covert - yes - this time, but they clearly will have a preference, like everybody who's watching this race, every interest that is.  Crystal Fincher: [00:41:44] Yes. And a handy PAC to support Bruce Harrell is already in existence. So, he certainly looks like he will have support. Jim Brunner: [00:41:52] I asked him about that - he said, you know, like candidates always say when you bring this up, Well, I didn't start it. You know, it's people like me so much. You know, what can I do? You know? So we'll see others - it's not going to be the only one.  Crystal Fincher: [00:42:05] Yeah. Yeah. It'll be - this will be an interesting race. And certainly just because a poll said this today does not mean it's going to stay that way. Polls are snapshots. We don't even know if those were legit polls and followed the standards of regular polling, or more just a marketing project. So -  Jim Brunner: [00:42:26] I mean, I think the campaigns - they want good data, they want good polling - but is that what they're releasing to us? Yeah. I don't know.  Crystal Fincher: [00:42:36] Yeah. So we - there's a lot of conversation we could have about that, especially how they released it, and what they were telling about those candidates. Which was interesting and not necessarily what you would expect, particularly from one of them. But they did tell the same top line story, so I found that interesting. But we have talked for a while today - we'll spare you more conversation, but I do want to thank you for listening to Hacks & Wonks on KVRU 105.7 FM this Friday, June 4th, 2021. The producer of Hacks & Wonks is Lisl Stadler and assisted by Shannon Cheng and Lexi Morritt. And our wonderful co-host today was Seattle Times political reporter, Jim Brunner. You can find Jim on Twitter @Jim_Brunner. That's B-R-U-N-N-E-R. You can find me on Twitter @finchfrii, spelled F-I-N-C-H-F-R-I-I. Now you can follow Hacks & Wonks on iTunes, Spotify, or wherever else you get your podcasts - just type "Hacks & Wonks" into the search bar, be sure to subscribe to get our Friday almost-live shows and our mid-week show delivered to your podcast feed. If you like us, leave a review whenever you listen to Hacks & Wonks. You can also get a full transcript of this episode and links to resources referenced in the show at officialhacksandwonks.com and in the episode notes. Thank you so much for joining us today, Jim - appreciate having you and your perspective and enlightening us about the congressional races.  Jim Brunner: [00:43:57] Thank you. It was a lot of fun - we could keep going.  Crystal Fincher: [00:44:00] Yeah, absolutely. And we'll talk to you all next time. And now, I'm super excited to have Shannon Cheng, who not only works with me at Fincher Consulting, but is the Chair of People Power Washington - Police Accountability. And is - really has been involved for years in all things police accountability, including in the city of Seattle. And so I just wanted to have her on real quick to talk about two big items this week. One, the Seattle City Council voting against the tough compromise bill to trim the SPD budget. And then two, the Council unanimously passing the Participatory Budgeting bill. So starting with that bill to trim the SPD budget, Shannon - what happened?  Shannon Cheng: [00:44:49] Yeah, that bill has been "tortured", I think, is the word I've seen used to describe it. So it started - all the protests that broke out last summer and people seeing how SPD treated peaceful protesters egregiously - there was a lot of call for wanting accountability for SPD and kind of their overspending. And so what happened is that at the end of last year, SPD came to City Council and said, "We need $5.4 million extra dollars for our 2020 budget" - because basically they had spent too much on overtime. And this angered both City Council and a lot of community activists, who had been spending the whole budget cycle wanting to cut back funding for SPD. And so what City Council ended up doing was - they needed to give them the money last year, but they said, "What we're going to do is take that same amount of money away from your 2021 budget. And so you need to do better next year and make sure to not overspend."  But then what has happened is that that money has - then the federal monitor who oversees the consent decree got involved and expressed concern that the Council was taking money away from the department. And so it's just gotten very complicated. There's been a lot of arguments with people wanting to take the money and the intent being about accountability, whereas other people are saying, "Hey, you can't take that money away because we need the police to provide a certain level of service." So the bill has gone through many, many different amendments and in the end - nothing happened. They ended up voting against it - and it was interesting because some councilmembers voted on the same side, but for very different reasons. So for example, Alex Pedersen voted against it because he doesn't believe in defunding at all, whereas Councilmembers Mosqueda, Morales, Sawant voted against it because it wasn't defunding enough. Crystal Fincher: [00:46:49] Interesting. And where was Lorena González on that?  Shannon Cheng: [00:46:52] She was kind of on the fence. She did vote against it, but she said something more along the lines of that we need to wait and see. And maybe this needs to get taken up during the normal budget cycle in terms of seeing how things play out with budget questions. So a less clear statement, but she did vote against it.  Crystal Fincher: [00:47:14] Okay. So nothing happened. So does this mean that there were basically no penalties for SPD intentionally overspending on their overtime budget?  Shannon Cheng: [00:47:26] I think that is still TBD because they don't - so basically nobody gets the money still. I think the money is still under proviso - so originally the intent was to take the money away from SPD and put it into Participatory Budgeting. And now it's just still on hold. So the bill that had been addressed had talked about a compromise where - okay, maybe only $2 million was going to be taken away and given to Participatory Budgeting, whereas the rest was going to go to other SPD priorities, such as community service officers and funding public disclosure request office budget needs. But - yeah, basically nothing is happening and they're tabling it for later.  Crystal Fincher: [00:48:12] So it may be taken up in the regular budgeting process. It may not be taken up at all. We'll just have to stay tuned and see, basically?  Shannon Cheng: [00:48:20] Yeah. Yep.  Crystal Fincher: [00:48:22] All right. So you also mentioned the Participatory Budgeting, and some of that money might have gone to it if it would have passed, but it did not. But what did pass unanimously with the Council was the entire Participatory Budgeting bill. What happened with that? Shannon Cheng: [00:48:38] Yeah! So that was huge and exciting - you know,  community activists have been working towards that for a very long time. And so last year, $30 million got promised for Participatory Budgeting that was going to be centering community. And it had been held up for a long time. I think that's been talked about on this show previously - there had been kind of tension between the mayor's office and City Council - and in the middle of all that were just the City staff trying to work on this problem and figuring out, Okay, how do we actually implement the program? And so what finally happened is Councilmember Morales introduced a bill where the Office of Civil Rights is going to be given money to hire some full-time employees to run the Request For Proposal process to find somebody, who will then run the Participatory Budgeting program. So, it's not like an immediate step. We're not going to get Participatory Budgeting happening tomorrow, but it is at least a step forward in direction of something where we had been kind of spinning in circles for basically six months.  Crystal Fincher: [00:49:48] Well, this is big news. And what does this do then, or how does this affect the Black Brilliance Project? Shannon Cheng: [00:49:57] So the Black Brilliance Project had put in the time and the research to propose a plan for how the implementation could happen and they submitted their proposal, so that was one of the things on the table. But one of the big things that came out of their report and that they mentioned was that they - there are certain City departments they don't necessarily trust - that have not done the best job of kind of truly representing community voices before. And so one of those was the Department of Neighborhoods. And so they had specifically asked that the Participatory Budgeting not be handled by that department. When the mayor's office released their counter proposal of how this should be handled, that was their suggestion - was that Department of Neighborhoods had already handled a much smaller Participatory Budgeting project in the past, so they said that we should just let them have it. It will save a lot of money because you know, they already have expertise there. But the problem is they don't have the trust. So this is kind of why things are being handed to the Office of Civil Rights instead, where that was the preferred office from the Black Brilliance Project to handle setting up the implementation. Crystal Fincher: [00:51:13] All right. Well, we will stay tuned to developments on this, but thank you so much for the expertise and information. Those, you know, were one big development and one big non-development, but important, especially as we consider these Council and mayoral races moving forward, but also in just how we consider public safety and how we're treating each other as community members in Seattle and beyond. So thanks so much, Shannon.  Shannon Cheng: [00:51:43] Yeah - thank you!  Crystal Fincher: [00:51:44] And if people want to get more information about People Power Washington, where can they go?  Shannon Cheng: [00:51:51] So our website is wethepeoplepower.org - it will get updated soon. We're going to be doing a voter guide for local elections coming up. So stay tuned - that will be updated in the next couple months.  Crystal Fincher: [00:52:05] Perfect. Thanks so much.

DHS website suggests reporting suspicious activity from domestic terror groups… GUEST: Matt Larkin is running for Congress in the 8th district, against Kim Schrier. // Powerline Blog: Associated Press, Hamas Propagandists. // JUST A FEW MORE THINGS: Canned laughter edition See omnystudio.com/listener for privacy information.

In partnership with the Washington Indivisible Network and Indivisible Tacoma, we bring you our Insider Town Hall Series, speaking with key decision-makers in Congress and the state legislature about issues Indivisibles care about. Today, 8th CD Congresswoman Dr. Kim Schrier. As the only physician representing our state (and as the only woman doctor in Congress), she joins us to talk about the COVID vaccine—what we know and don't know at this point about its distribution and its effectiveness. The Congresswoman also shares her work on a rapid home-test that could be a game changer in the fight against the virus. We also discuss Indivisible's priorities for 2021, and how we can all work together to achieve them. This conversation was recorded on the evening of Thursday, December 17th.

As part of our town hall series in partnership with the Washington Indivisible Network and Indivisible Tacoma, we present a conversation with 8th District Congresswoman, Dr. Kim Schrier, who is running for re-election in November. Congresswoman Schrier is the first Democrat to hold this seat in the history of the district, in large part because the 8th district was drawn to be a Republican stronghold. In her first term, she has proven to a highly effective member of our state's Democratic delegation, and this podcast offers an opportunity to get to know her, and to get excited to #DoTheWork to get her up and over the finish line in November. Links: https://drkimschrier.com/

This week, we talk first with Congresswoman elect from the 8th CD, Dr. Kim Schrier. In a wide ranging discussion, we talk about her experiences thus far in DC, about the surprising election night, and about what she plans to do right away on issues like gun safety, checking corruption in the Trump administration, and, of course, health care. Also, the state of GA has been in the spotlight following the midterms, in part because the 6th district elected its first African American ever, and its first Democrat since 1979, and also because of the contested gubernatorial race there. We check in with the head of Indivisible GA's 6th to get a view from the ground. And finally, back here in Washington, the Democratic party will be undergoing a reorganization, or reorg, and 5th LD committee member Josh Trupin joins us to break down what it all means. Links: Guide to WA Democratic Party Re-org Dates: http://bit.ly/WAReorg2018 https://www.facebook.com/wareorganization/

Major Garrett on the future of Congress // Feliks Banel on the 1890 election, Washington's first // Hanna Scott runs down the winners in the WA legislative races // Sports Insider Danny O'Neil on Bruce Irvin's future/ Lou Piniella and Edgar Martinez's chances for Cooperstown // Hanna Scott runs down the winners and losers among initiatives and levies // Kim Schrier live

Kim Schrier talks taxes, healthcare, Trump, and makes her case for becoming the first Democrat to be elected in Washington's 8th Congressional District.

Ron Fein is a constitutional lawyer and the legal director for Free Speech for People, a nonprofit founded in the wake of the Citizens United ruling, and he lays out eight charges in a book he co-authored called “The Constitution Demands It—the Case for the Impeachment of Donald Trump." In our wide-ranging discussion, we talk about what the framers intended with impeachment, and about how, while each of Trump's transgressions may not precisely rise to the level of criminal infractions, they add up to a tyrannical abuse of power that the Founding Fathers very much warned us against. https://www.impeachmentproject.org/ Then, in the wake of the news of the planned Seattle school strike, Washington's Paramount Duty co-founder and president Summer Stinson joins us to talk about how we wound up here, and what might be a way forward. Links: Sign up to volunteer with the Kim Schrier campaign here: https://secure.ngpvan.com/p/0vxE708gzECUM5CaFu7rLw2 Calendar of volunteer events for Carolyn Long: https://www.electlong.com/calendar/ Lisa Brown volunteer opportunities: https://act.myngp.com/Forms/-8635854529547597056

Dave Ross on the Sarah Sander refusal to denounce "the enemy of the people" // Trump's tripling down on "rapists and criminals" comment // Kim Schrier, candidate for WA’s 8th District // Tom Tangney reviews "Christopher Robin" // Robert Jones with the latest voting polls -- it's not looking good for the millennial vote

With the August 7th primary almost upon us, we check back in one last time with the three Democratic candidates running for Congress in the 8th district, Kim Schrier, Shannon Hader, and Jason Rittereiser, for some closing remarks about their experiences campaigning over the last year, how they've each evolved, and what they each hope to bring to the constituents of the 8th district. Then, following Monday's protest against Republican Devin Nunes's visit to Spokane for a Cathy McMorris Rodgers fundraiser, we talk to the leaders from Indivisible Spokane and Central Valley Indivisible (in Nunes's home district) about the creative ways they collaborated to make Nunes feel particularly unwelcome here in Washington. Links: Kim Schrier: https://www.drkimschrier.com/ Shannon Hader: http://drshannonforcongress.com/ Jason Rittereiser: https://www.jasonrittereiser.com/ Lisa Brown's website: https://lisabrownforcongress.com/ Lisa Brown's WSIP interview: https://soundcloud.com/wsip/ep-42-suzi-eric-levine-on-eric-holders-gerrymandering-project-dem-5th-cd-candidate-lisa-brown Andrew Janz's website: www.andrewjanzforcongress.com Andrew Janz WSIP interview: https://soundcloud.com/wsip/50-andrew-janzs-run-to-unseat-devin-nunes-uws-kathryn-watts-on-the-limits-of-presidential-power

This week, a chat with Democratic candidate Carolyn Long, who is running for Congress in Washington's 3rd district. Long is a professor of political science at Washington State University Vancouver, and she talks about why she decided to jump into the race, and she details her pragmatic approach to politics. Then, the endorsements are in! A coalition of Indivisible groups in Washington 8th district have voted to endorse Jason Rittereiser and Kim Schrier, so we speak with both of them about what the nod means, and about how each of their campaigns are ramping up as the August primary draws closer.

UW Prof Kyle Crowder on how some people self-segregate, and how that's not always a problem // Margaret Brennan, host of Face the Nation, on Russia-US diplomatic ping pong // Michael Medved really likes Ready Player One // Colleen O'Brien's dose of kindness -- bomb squad develops beeping Easter eggs, so visually impaired kids can have hunts too // Sports Insider Danny O'Neil on a very un-Mariner Mariners Opening Day win // Jeff Gilbert live on EPA fuel standard deregulation/ Tesla recall/ Uber self-driving death // Dr. Kim Schrier, running for Dave Reichert's 8th District seat

This week, we sit down with Democratic candidate for the 8th congressional district, Dr. Kim Schrier, about her views on healthcare, immigration, the climate, and the role of empathy in American politics. We also speak with The Stranger's Heidi Groover about the resignation of Seattle Mayor Ed Murray. All that, plus a weekly call to action!